CONTESTED-ELECTION CASE 


OF 

HENRY T. RAINEY 

u 

V. 

GUY L. SHAW 


FROM THE 

TWENTIETH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 
OF ILLINOIS 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1921 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

•^SIVED 

MAY27198J 

0©©WM£NTS DIVISION 






-r 

Yl* 

T S 1?» 

-n 


CONTESTED-ELECTION CASE 

OF 

HENRY T. RAINEY v. GUY L. SHAW 

FROM THE 

TWENTIETH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. 


NOTICE OF CONTEST. 


To Guy L. Shaw. 

Beardstown, III.: 


Washington, D. C., December ill, 1920. 


You are hereby notified that I will contest your election as a Member of the 
House of Representatives of the United States from the twentieth congressional 
district of Illinois for the following reasons: 

1. You did not tile with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the state¬ 
ment required to be filed before the 1920 pr.mary under the Federal campaign 
publicity act. 

2. Y T ou did not tile with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the state¬ 
ment required to be tiled after the 1920 primary under the Federal campaign 
publicity act. 

3. Y T ou did not file with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the state¬ 
ment required to be tiled before the 1920 general election under the Federal 
campaign publicity act. 

4. You did not file with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the state¬ 

ment required to be filed after the 1920 general election under the Federal 
campaign publicity act. . ... 

5. Y r ou did not, as required by law, account for $1,000 donated to you by the 
Republican national congressional committee on the 8tli day of October, 1920, 
to be used by you in your campaign. 

6. You did not account for $1,000, as required by law, donated to you by the 
Republican national congressional committee on the 23d day of October, 1920, 
to be used by you in your campaign. 

7. You did not in any manner in any statement tiled by you in compliance 
with the law account for further campaign contributions received by you from 
other 1 sources. 

8. Y T ou converted to your own use a considerable portion of the moneys do¬ 
nated to you by the Republican national congressional committee, and you did 
not use the moneys they donated to you in payment of your expenses as a can¬ 
didate for Congress in the twentieth congressional district of Illinois, nor did 
you return the unused portions of same. 

9. You converted to your own use and did not use in your campaign for nomi¬ 
nation and election as a candidate for Congress in the twentieth congressional 
district of Illinois other sums of money contributed from other sources. 

10. You have failed to comply with the Federal act providing for publicity of 
contributions, and if indicted under said act you are liable, upon conviction of the 
four offenses you have committed, to fines amounting in the aggregate not to 
exceed $4,000. or to imprisonment not to exceed in the aggregate four years, 
or to both fines and imprisonment. 

11. If indicted and convicted in the State courts of Illinois for misappropria¬ 
tion of funds contributed for your campaign expenses, you are liable also to the 
penalties provided by the laws of Illinois. 





4 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


You are notified that it is my intention to contest your election and I rely par¬ 
ticularly upon the grounds stated in this notice. 


Henry T. Rainey, Contestant. 


State of Illinois, 

Cass County , ss: 


W. W. Dieterich. being duly sworn on his oath, states that he is 44 years of 
age and resides in Beardstown, Cass County, Ill. Affiant further states that on 
the 19tli day of December, 1920, he served the above notice on Guy L. Shaw 
by delivering to him a true copy thereof. 

W. W. Dieterich. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 20th day of December, A. D. 1920. 


[ seal. ] 

My commission expires June 17. 1923. 


E. Miller Dunn. 

Notary Public. 


ANSWER OF CONTESTEE TO NOTICE OF CONTEST. 


Washington, D. C., February 23, 1921. 

Not admitting or confessing the truth of any of the items or specifications 
contained in the notice of contest herein, and denying the sufficiency of said 
notice of contest as a basis for a contest of election of a Representative in Con¬ 
gress. and protesting that such notice, and the matters and tilings therein con¬ 
tained are scandalous, impertinent, and gratuitously insulting and libelous, the 
said contestee nevertheless makes answer thereto as follows: that is, to say: 

1. He expressly denies the truth of every allegation of fact contained in the 
11 separate items and specifications in said notice of contest. 

2. He denies that he failed or refused to execute and post the several reports 
of receipts and expenditures referred to in specifications Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 of 
said notice, with reference to both the primary and the election campaigns in 
the year 1920; and he avers, on the contrary, that the same were made and filed 
pursuant to the acts of Congress in such cases provided ; and he makes reference 
to his affidavit and copies filed with the Clerk of the House on January 31, 1921, 
and makes the same parts hereof for the purposes hereof. 

3. He denies that he failed to account, as required by law, for two separate 
contributions of $1,000 each to his campaign expenses by the Republican na¬ 
tional congressional committee, as referred to in specifications Nos. 5 and 6 of 
said notice of contest, and he avers, on the contrary, that he did fully account 
for and lawfully expend the same in the way and manner set forth in his affi¬ 
davit and copies filed with the Clerk of the House on January 21, 1921, express 
reference being here made in said affidavit and copies for the purposes hereof. 

4. He denies that he received or that he was or is bound to account for any 
further campaign contributions made to or for him during said campaign by 
any person or persons other than said two separate contributions of $1,000 each 
so received from the Republican national congressional committee, as referred 
to in specification No. 7 in said notice of contest. 

5. He denies that he converted to his own use any portion of the contributions 
of the Republican national congressional committee, as charged in specification 
No. 8 of said notice of contest; and he denies that he converted to his own use 
any sums of money contributed from other sources to his said primary and elec¬ 
tion campaigns as charged in specification No. 9 of said notice of contest; and 
he avers, on the contrary, that he received no contributions to said campaigns 
except said two contributions from the Republican national congressional com¬ 
mittee; and he further avers that said sums so contributed were actually and 
lawfully used and expended in said campaigns, as will more fully appear from 
his affidavit and copies filed with the Clerk of the House on January 31, 1921, 
express reference being made thereto for the purposes hereof. 

6. He denies and resents the matters and things set forth in specifications Nos. 
19 and 11 of said notice of contest. 

7. Further answering, the contestee avers that the contributions to his said 
primary and election campaigns were reasonable in amount and well within the 
amount allowed by law for those purposes; that all of said contributions, to¬ 
gether with some money of contestee, were actually and legitimately expended 
in said primary and election campaigns; that no fraud was practiced by con¬ 
testee, and no elector was corrupted by or for contestee; that contestee assumed 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


5 


and believed that this contest would he abandoned, and would not be pursued 
beyond the notice of contest; that he neglected to make and serve this answer 
upon contestant, or to take any steps toward a defense of the same until more 
than 30 days after service on him of the notice of contest; that he had no 
improper or ulterior motive in failing to sooner prepare to defend his right to 
his seat in the House; that the new House to which contestee was elected has 
not yet organized; that no injury to contestant, or to any other person, or to 
the House has followed from a failure to sooner prepare and serve this answer 
on contestant, and that the same ought to be received and treated as if prepared 
and served within the time limited by act of Congress; that contestee was elected 
by an honest and clear majority of nearly 4,000 votes, and that to deprive him 
of his seat would be unjust to him as well as to the voters of said congressional 
district; that this contest is not made or prosecuted in good faith, but is the 
product of envy and malice. 

Guy L. Shaw, Contestee. 

By William Mumfobd, Attorney for Contestee. 

DEPOSITIONS IX 111]HALF OF CONTESTANT. 

NOTARY PUBLIC’S SUBPOENA. 


District of Columbia , to wit, greeting: 

I, Charles E. Gephardt, a notary public in and for the District of Columbia, 
do summon T. E. Meeker, 701 Albee Building, Washington, D. C., to be and to 
appear before me at the ollice of the Clerk of the United States House of Rep¬ 
resentatives, Capitol Building, Washington, D. C., on the 23d day of February, 
A. D. 1921, at 10 o’clock a. m., to answer as a witness in the matter of the con¬ 
tested election case in which Henry D. Itainey is contestant and Guy L. Shaw 
is contestee, and bring with him a copy of a certain letter dated October 11, 
1920, addressed by the Republican National Congressional Committee to all 
Republican nominees for Representative in Congress to be voted on at the gen¬ 
eral election held November 2, 1920, and copies of all forms for making reports 
of all expenses of said nominees for Representative which accompanied said 
letter of October 11, 1920, that was sent to all Republican nominees for Repre¬ 
sentative in Congress by the said Republican National Congressional Committee. 

This subpoena is issued in accordance with Revised Statutes, section 110 of 
the act of February 19, 1851, chapter 11. 9 Statutes at Large, page 568. section 
3; act of January* 23. 1869. chapter 15, 15 Statutes at Large, page 267; and 
Revised Statutes 117. act of January 10, 1873, chapter 24, 17 Statutes at Large, 
page 408, section 2. 

Given under my hand and seal this 18th day of February, A. D. 1921. 

Lseal.] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 

The original of the above copy served on T. C. Meeker by me personally. 

Charles E. Gebhardt. 


Depositions of Henry T. Rainey, William Tyler Page, and T. C. Meeker, 
taken before me, Charles E. Gebhardt, a notary public in and for the Distiict 
of Columbia, at the office of William Tyler Page, Clerk of the United States 
House of Representatives, Capitol Building, Washington, D. C., on the 23d day 
of February, 1921, at 10 o’clock a. m. 

Present: Henrv T. Rainey, contestant; John F. McCarron, attorney for con¬ 
testant; Guy L. Shaw, contestee; William Mumford, attorney for contestee; 
William Tyler Page; T. C. Meeker. 


Whereupon the said HENRY T. RAINEY, being present, was duly sworn by 
me as a witness in the above matter to testify to the truth and nothing but the 
truth, and he testified as follows: 


Examination by Mr. McCarron : 

Q Will vou please state your full name?—A. My name is Henry T. Ramey; 
I live at Carrollton, Ill.; I am the contestant in this proceeding. On the lbtli 
dav of December, 1920, I mailed to Guy L. Shaw, contestee, at Ins post-office 
address, Beardstown, Ill., a letter in a registered envelope, a copy of which I 
have retained and which I introduce and ask that it be marked Exhibit A. 


6 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


The letter was accompanied by a notice of contest and assigning certain reasons, 
dated also the 16th day of December, 1920. In my letter to Mr. Shaw I asked 
him to acknowledge receipt of the same, and inclosed two copies, but I never 
heard from Mr. Shaw in the matter at all. On a later day I, however, received 
back through the post office the notice which accompanied the letter by reg¬ 
istered mail, by which it appears that the registered letter was delivered to 
Guy L. Show on the 20th day of December, 1920—the letter which contained 
the notice of contest. I offer in evidence the return receipt, signed by Guy L. 
Shaw, and ask that it be marked “Exhibit B.” On the 20th day of December, 
1920, notice was personally served on Mr. Shaw by Hon. W. H. Dietericli, one 
of my attorneys, who lives in Beardstown, Ill. I have here the original notice 
which was served by Mr. Dietericli, which appears by his affidavit of service. 
I introduce and ask that it be marked “ Exhibit C.” An election in Illinois at 
which candidates for Congress were selected by the respective parties—the 
Democratic Party and the Republican Party—was held under the laws of 
Illinois on the Wednesday after the second Tuesday in September, which would 
be the 15tli day of September. The canvass of votes cast at the election 
for members of Congress and the proclamation issued by the governor under 
the statutes of Illinois was completed on the 1st day of December, 1920, by the 
State officers authorized by law to conduct the canvass, and on the 1st day of 
December, 1920. the governor issued his proclamation declaring this canvass. 
I have here a letter from Louis L. Emmerson, secretary of state, dated January 
26. 1921, corroborating my recollection of the matter and advising me that the 
canvass was completed and the governor’s proclamation was issued on the 1st 
day of December. 1920, which I offer in evidence and ask that it be marked 
“ Exhibit D.” 

Mr. Mumford. Contestee objects to the admissibility of this document, because 
it is insufficiently certified and it is immaterial. 

The Witness. At the primary election held on the 15tli day of September, 
1920, for the selection of candidates for Congress, Hon. Guy L. Shaw, of Beards¬ 
town, Ill., was the only Republican candidate: and at the elections which fol¬ 
lowed on the 2d day of November, 1920, Hon. Guy L. Shaw was the Republican 
candidate for Congress in the twentieth district of Illinois; I refer to the selec¬ 
tion of primary candidates for Congress and to the election for the selection of 
a Representative in Congress from the twentieth district of Illinois. 

I might further state that the notice of contest served by me upon Mr. Shaw 
was served within the time required by law. and that the time provided for Mr. 
Shaw to answer the same has passed. No answer was ever served on me until 
a few minutes ago in this room, when Mr. Mumford, representing Mr. Shaw, 
tendered me what he states purports to be an answer to my notice of contest. I 
also have here the notice to Mr. Shaw of my intention to take this testimony 
to-day in this office in the city of Washington, served by Mr. W. H. Dieterich, 
and ask that it be attached to the exhibits and marked “ Exhibit E.” 

Mr. Mumford. No objection. 

Mr. McCarron. That is all. 

Cross-examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. Mr. Rainey, in your notice of contest I see that you make 11 specifications 
of the particular grounds upon which you propose to prosecute this contest. The 
first four of these grounds, as specified in your notice of contest, relate to the 
alleged failure upon the part of Mr. Shaw to report to the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives, under the various acts of Congress, his receipts and expendi¬ 
tures in his primary and election campaigns. What basis did you have, Mr. 
Rainey, for alleging that these reports had not been made?—A. I made a search 
in the office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives in the place where 
they should have been deposited: also in the record book where receipt should 
have been entered and found that none had been received, and that neither 
had any entry been made in the usual and proper place in the records of 
the office of the Clerk. I also talked with Mr. Hollingsworth, who was in 
that particular room in the Clerk’s office, where these records were kept, 
and he advised me that there was no record of the receipt of any publicity or 
expense reports from Mr. Shaw. We also talked to Hon. William Tyler Page, 
Clerk of the House of Representatives, to whom the reports should be made, and 
he told me that Mr. Shaw’s record in his office in this particular was blank, and 
he had no record. 

Q. Did you make any other or further investigation upon the subject before 
or after you made this search?—A. No. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 7 

Q. Did you make any investigation at Beardstown as to the deposit in the 
post office there of these reports?—A. No. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Dr. Schweer, the postmaster at Beardstown?—A. 
Yes. 

Q. Are your relations with him intimate?—A. Rather. 

Q. And have been for a number of years?—A. Yes. 

Q- Assuming for the purpose of this question that Dr. Schweer said that 
Mr. Shaw would never get his seat in Congress, and that if elected would never 
be seated, have you any idea as to the purpose or theory he had in his mind 
when he made such a statement, if he made it? 

Mr. McCarron. I object to that question. 

A. I do not know that he made it, and whether he had any purpose in his 
mind when he made it. If he did make such a statement it was after I 
tiled this contest, and the reason for it probably was that I had subsequently 
advised him there were no expense reports on record here from Mr. Shaw. 

Q. Have you received any notice of any sort from the postmaster at 
Beardstown, directly or indirectly, as to whether these reports have been 
deposited in the post office by Mr. Shaw?—A. No. 

Q. Have you any recollection of any communications?—A. No. 

Q- Do you know whether Mr. Dieterich has had any communications or 
conversations?—A. I do not know. 

Q. You are not advised?—A. No. I do not know what conversation he has 
had with Mr. Schweer. 

Q. In your fifth specification, Mr. Rainey, you complain or charge that the 
contestee did not account for the $1,000 received by him from the Republican 
national congressional committee on the 8th day of October, 1920, to be used 
by him in his campaign. Just what do you mean by saying he did not account 
for it?—A. That he tiled no account. 

Q. You refer to the reports which you specify in the first four paragraphs?— 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In your sixth specification you state that he did not account for the 
$1,000 received by him from the same committee on the 23d of October, 1920. 
to be used in his campaign. That also relates to his failure to make these 
reports?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And to nothing else?—A. No. 

Q. In your seventh specification you say that the contestee did not in any 
manner account for further campaign contributions received from other sources. 
What other sources do you refer to?—A. I do not know of any. At that time 
I suppose he received contributions from the State committee, which made 
contributions, but I do not know whether he did or whether he did not. 

Q. So you did not have any knowledge on which to base this specification at 
all?—A. None at all, except that my inference was that 1 supposed he received 
them, as they had plenty of money in this district. 

(>. Does the specification justify, in your opinion, the charge that the act 
mentioned in the notice has been done?—A. That is a matter of practice 
before the committee. I do not know the practice before the committee, but 
that is a matter which is subject to be answered within the time provided 
by law. 

Q. In your eighth specification you make the charge that this contestee con¬ 
verted to his own use a considerable portion of the moneys received by him for 
campaign purposes from the Republican National Congressional Committee.—A. 
Y T es, sir. 

Q. Upon what basis or authority do you make that charge?—A. Because I 
saw no evidence of the expenditure in my district of that sum of money by Mr. 
Shaw. I made a thorough campaign in my district, covering every county in 
the district, and was well advised as to local conditions everywhere. The only 
evidence I had that Mr. Shaw had spent any money, or anyone for him, was 
that just before the election some campaign lithographs made their appearance 
in some of the larger towns of the district announcing Mr. Shaw’s candidacy. 
I myself had covered the district with lithographs and know what it costs, 
and I sent out a thousand lithographs, I think, at tin expense of $70. I do 
not think Mr. Shaw's lithographs cost this much, or anything like it. The only 
other evidence I saw of the expenditure of money in my district by Mr. Shaw 
was two circular letters which he sent through the mails, addressed particu¬ 
larly to farmers. I received both the letters myself, addressed to me, asking 
me to vote for Mr. Shaw, and each community and myself and neighbors, who 
were farmers, received sim.lar letters; others who were not, did not receive 


8 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


similar letters. Therefore, I concluded that Mr. Sliaw was using one of the 
farmers’ directories of the twentieth congressional district. I know of no 
farmers’ directory except the Prairie Farmer Directory, and as his letters went 
to Democratic and Republican farmers I presume the list did not contain more 
than 10,000 names at the outside, and the circulars could not have cost him over 
$400 or $500. I saw no other evidence of other expenditures by Mr. Shaw, ex¬ 
cept that once I heard he came through Carrollton, where I lived, in an auto¬ 
mobile, going through the district, and, of course, there was some expense con¬ 
nected with that. He also sent out, I think, in one of his letters, a short cir¬ 
cular on the subject of Argentine corn and the necessity for putting a tariff on 
Argentine corn. I do not know whether this circular was one prepared by the 
Republican committee or whether he prepared it. If he prepared it, that cost 
some money. He had no workers at the polls, so far as I was able to leam 
from my friends, in any part of my district, and there were no watchers as to 
count of ballots. A contest is always fairly conducted in a district like that. 
These are the only evidences I have of the expenditure by Mr. Shaw of any 
money in the campaign, and the evidence I have after a rather very careful 
investigation and my conclusion is that he could not have expended anything 
like the sum of $2,000, including the items of expenditure for paid publicity 
in the newspapers of the district. I did not notice a wide publicity, but I 
noticed in several newspapers, and I take them all, a letter from Mr. Shaw, 
some of them, one or two at least, marked advertisement. 

Q. Does not that cost money?—A. Yes. 

Q. Do you know how many of the newspapers in the twentieth district car¬ 
ried publicity matter for which he paid?—A. No, sir. 

Q. You are entirely unqualified to estimate expenses on that account?—A. 
Yes. The newspapers in the district do not charge exorbitant rates. 

Q. Did you ever see one instance of publicity obtained as advertising 
matter?—A. I think I saw two or three. 

Q. Otherwise you saw no evidence of any expend ture of money in that dis¬ 
trict by Mr. Shaw?—A. No. 

Q. Of course, you saw no evidence of any corrupt use of money—at that elec¬ 
tion at that time?—A. There was none. In my own home town lie had working 
for him a man, Yates Fishback, who was the only man I could see who was 
doing anything for Mr. Shaw, and the only thing that he did was to make' 
two bets on the election as to the number of votes he would carry my home 
town by, and he lost both of those bets. The question in my mind is as to 
whether that was a proper expenditure under the laws of Illinois. 

Q. You state that the money was furnished by Mr. Shaw. You are well 
pleased with the bet?—A. No, sir; I am not complaining. 

Q. Now, Mr. Rainey, whatever irregularities or omissions you charge against 
Mr. Shaw, you do not mean them to have affected the validity of the election?— 
A. No, sir. I have just stated the reasons in the notice of contest. 

Q. You state that by his om'ssions he has forfeited h s right to this seat?— 
A. Yes. sir. 

Q. And your attitude is that if he has been negligent in complying with cer¬ 
tain provisions of the law, you w 11 be just tied in causing the people of that 
district to he deprived of representation?—A. That is a matter for argument. 

Q. That is your attitude?—A. No; not at all. My attitude is that a district 
ought to be represented by a man who understands the law and who will 
comply with the law in making his campaign. He has failed to comply with it, 
and it should be determined by the Committee on Elections what the result 
should be—whether there shall be another election or as to whether or not the 
votes cast for him are void on account of his failure to comply. That is for 
the consideration of the House. 

Q. Your position is that he is ineligible?—A. That is a matter of law. My 
attitude is that to answer your question involves an argument as to the issue. 
Under the Constitution and the laws a man must be 21 years old ; he must be 
a resident of the State. 

Q. There is no question of that in this instance.—A. Under the law, I 
undertake to say that if Mr. Shaw did not come up with these two require¬ 
ments, his election would be void. Under the law. also, he must be elected either 
by ballots or by the use of voting machines; unless he is elected in one or the 
other of these two ways, the votes cast for him would be void. And so of 
every other law which has to do with the time, place, and manner of electing 
Members of Congress—and as to the campaign publicity law of 1911—if he 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


9 


has not complied with it, the question is for the House to determine. That 
situation is the same as any other. 

Q. Now, Mr. Rainey, assuming that you failed to tind evidence through 
which Mr. Shaw expended money in the district, what justification have you 
for asserting conversion to his own use?—A. They told me at Beardstown of 
collecting debts from Mr. Shaw at the t me he received these contributions 
from the national committee. I was advised that in Beardstown merchants 
commenced to collect debts from Mr. Shaw for household expenses and for 
rents and for printing bills which had been outstanding for a long time and 
which has not been paid. To some of them he had given checks which had 
been repudiated by the banks, and I was told that that was a frequent occur¬ 
rence in Beardstown and vicinity prior to the time of the receipt of this money 
from the national committee; and I was also advised that after the election 
checks drawn on the banks in which he kept his deposits were returned no 
funds” and that these checks had not yet been paid, and some of them had 
to do with his campaign expenses for Congress, notably $250 paid to his ste¬ 
nographer, who did campaign work for him; and with -these facts in mind and 
statements made to me by gentlemen whom I have confidence in, I reached the 
conclusion from that evidence that some of this money went to his personal use. 

Q. You feel that this hearsay information justifies you in making a direct 
and express charge that he misappropriated th s money?—A. Y T es, sir. 

Q. You have no direct information on the subject at all?—A. Well, it is not 
exactly hearsay. No; that is not hearsay, because the checks went through 
the banks. 

Q. Now, you state in the ninth specification that he converted to his own use 
other sums contributed from other sources. Just what other sources do you refer 
to?—A. I stated a while ago what the other sources were. 

Q. You know of nothing to justify the statement?—A. Except as I have 
stated. 

Q. In your tenth and eleventh specifications you admonish the contestee of 
the situation he is in and the penalties, punishments, etc., What is your object 
in inserting that? I do not think that has any place in the notice.—A. If there 
was money which he did not account for, under the laws of Illinois the result 
might have been a prosecution under the criminal laws of Illinois. 

Q. Wliat occasion was there for you to admonish him for the criminal situa¬ 
tion he was in?—A. Well, I don’t know that it did any good at all to ad¬ 
monish him. He did not answer my notice and lie did not tile his reports here 
at all. At that time there were no expense reports on file, when I served him 
with this notice, so I presumed my admonishment would not do any harm. 

Q. You have introduced in evidence without objection a notice for the taking 
of these depositions in Washington, D. (\, to-day. Were you acquainted with 
the fact that your attorneys in Beardstown served notice on Mr. Shaw to come 
here and attend the taking of depositions, and also with notice of depositions 
in Beardstown, to be taken on the 25th of this month? That was not done with 
your approval?—A. I did not know of it. Under the decisions of the House of 
Representatives and the committee testimony can be taken in more than one 
place. 

Q. Do you approve of the act of your attorney in giving notice of taking testi¬ 
mony at two points, 1,000 miles from each other, at the same time?—A. I have 
this notice I sent myself. I did not know about serving the other notice. 

Mr. Mumford. I think that is all. 

The Witness. I will say, in further reply, that the time within which my 
testimony could be taken depended entirely, under the law, upon the date when 
I was served with his answer, and his answer was not served on me at all 
within the time. I waited for it, expecting to take evidence within 40 days 
after he served his answer. The answer has not been served—until a few 
minutes ago. I was in doubt as to when I should take this testimony. That 
is the reason for taking testimony just before the expiration of rhe 40 days 
which had elapsed from the last date he had to serve notice. It may be that 
I am not required at all to complete this testimony within 40 days of the ex¬ 
piration of the time, but I am not sure as to that in the absence of any express 
finding by the House of Representatives, so I have agreed with my attorneys 
that we had better conclude taking all testimony within 40 days from the ex¬ 
piration of the 30 days. This is the reason for the hurry in taking this testi¬ 
mony. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


10 

Mr. McCarron. Is it not also a fact that in the notice of the hearing to be 
held to-day that it is dated February 14 and that you endeavored to give to the 
contestee as much time as possible in which to come to Washington to be present 
at these hearings? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Henry T. Rainey. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this Ttli day of March, 1921. 

[seal]. Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 

Whereupon the said WILLIAM TYLER PAGE, being present, was duly sworn 
by me as a witness in the above matter to testify to the truth and nothing but 
the truth, and he testified as follows: 

Examination by Mr. McCakron : 

Q. Will you please state your full name, address, and your official position?— 
A. William Tyler Page, Friendsh'p Heights, Md., Clerk of the House of 
Representatives. 

Q. Mr. Page, were you Clerk of the House of Representatives of the United 
States during the entire year of 1920?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I hand you a copy of the notice of contestant, Henry T. Rainey, of the 
election of Guy L. Shaw as a Member of the House of Representatives of the 
United States from the twentieth congressional d strict of Illinois, which was 
served by Mr. Rainey on Mr. Shaw, through one of Ills attorneys, W. H. Diete- 
ricli. This has already been introduced in evidence as one of the contestant's 
exh.bits. You will notice in paragraph 1 of sa'd notice the statement “you 
did not tile with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the statement re¬ 
quired to be tiled before the 1920 primary under the Federal campa'gn publicity 
act.” Please state if Mr. Guy L. Shaw, the Representative named for Congress 
for the twentieth congressional district of Illinois filed with you as Clerk of 
the House of Representatives any statement of his primary expenses not less 
than 10 nor more than 15 days before the day of holding the primary election in 
Illinois, which was, I believe, on September 15, 1920, which was required by the 
act of August 19, 1911, public law No. 32, as amended by the act of Congress of 
August 23, 1912. public law No. 298.—A. I can best answer that question,. 
I believe, by stating that the contestant, Mr. Rainey, on a number of occasions 
subsequently to the election on November 2, 1920, visited this office and inquired 
regarding the filing of statements of receipts and expenditures as required 
by law to be filed in this office by Mr. Guy L. Shaw. He examined the large 
book in which we keep a record of such statements, in addition to inquiring 
whether any such statements had been filed. The space provided in that book 
for the twentieth congressional district of Illinois remained a blank during 
and subsequently to the campaign, which, upon his visit to the office, Mr. Rainey 
could see for himself was a blank. In addition to this book the statements 
themselves are filed according to States and in numerical order of the districts. 
Upon examination of the place into which would be filed the statements from 
that congressional district there were none of Mr. Guy L. Shaw. And I did 
not receive, as Clerk of the House, any statements from Mr. Sliaw during the 
campaign or until some time subsequently, when, not a great while ago, 
I forget .lust the exact date, but that is easily ascertained by consultation with 
the records, there was filed in this office by Mr. Shaw, in person, an affidavit 
setting forth statements of receipts and expenditures in that campa'gn, with 
the exception of any statement of such receipts and expenditures prior to the 
date on which the primary elect’on was held. Notwithstanding tlrs affidavit of 
which I speak was filed after the t me prescribed by law, I filed it in the 
receptacle where the statements would have been filed had they been presented 
to me in time. After I had received unofficial information to the effect that 
this contest had been instituted, Mr. Ra ney vis'ted this office and inquired of 
me verbally whether or not statements had been filed by Mr. Guy L. Shaw of 
the kind I have just mentioned, under the law, at which time I told Mr. Rainey 
that such statements had not been filed. Then, under date of December 13, 
1920, Mr. Rainey addressed to me a letter asking me to advise b in as to what 
dates “ you have filed my campaign-expense statements, mailed in accordance- 
with the law both before and after the Illinois 1920 primary election. Also as 
to what dates you have filed my campaign-expense statements filed before and 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


11 


alter the general 1920 election as a candidate for Congress from the twentieth 
Illinois district. Also whether any other candidate for Congress of any other 
party in said twentieth Illinois district tiled any campaign-expense statements 
before or after the 1920 primary election, or tiled any campaign-expense state¬ 
ments either before or after the general 1920 election.” To which letter, under 
date of December 14, 1920, I replied that the records of this office show the 
tiling by you as a candidate for Representative in Congress from the twentieth 
district of Illinois of statements required to be tiled under the Federal 
publicity acts, to wit, before primary, September 7. 1920; after primary, Sep¬ 
tember 27, 1920; before general election, October 25, 1920; after general elec¬ 
tion, December 2, 1920; and then my letter went on to state “ it does not appear 
that any person a candidate for Representative in the Sixty-seventh Congress 
from the twentieth congressional district of Illinois tiled any statements before 
or after the primary election or before or after the general election in accord¬ 
ance with Federal laws relating to campaign contributions.” But, as I stated 
a moment ago, some time this winter, if my recollection serves me right, De¬ 
cember 27, there was tiled in this office by Mr. Shaw an affidavit with respect 
to receipts and expenditures after the primary election and before and after 
the general election. 

Q. Then I understand, Mr. Page, that there is no record in your office that 
Mr. Guy L. Shaw tiled a statement of his campaign expenses before the pri¬ 
mary held in Illinois on September 15, 1920, at least 10 days and not more than 
15 days before said primary?—A. I have stated that. 

Q. And that he did not hie at any time before or after said primary on the 
15th day of September, 1920, any campaign statement?—A. No, sir. 

Q. And that he did not tile not less than 10 days nor more than 15 days 
before the date of the general election on November 2. 1920, a statement of his 
campaign expenses?—A. No, sir. 

Q. That he did not hie within 30 days after the general election held Novem¬ 
ber 2, 1920, a statement of his campaign expenses as required by law?—A. 
No, sir. 

Q. I call your attention. Mr. Page, to paragraph five of the notice before 
you in which it is stated, “ You did not, as required by law, account for $1,000 
donated to you by the Republican National Congressional Committee on the 
Sth day of October, 1920, to be used by you in your campaign.” Will you 
please state if the treasurer of the Republican National Congressional Com¬ 
mittee hied with you a statement not more than 15 days nor less than 10 days 
next before November 2. 1920, an itemized, detailed statement, and on each 
sixth day thereafter, until the date of the said general election on November 
2, 1920, of all moneys and things of value received by said committee and the 
disbursements made by said committee to any person or persons?—A. He did. 

Q. Will you also state if there is an item or items in said statement hied by 
the treasurer of the Republican National Congressional Committee prior to 
said general election showing the payment by him to Mr. Guy L. Shaw, of 
Beardstown, Representative named for the twentieth congressional district of 
Illinois, of $1,000 on October 8, 1920, and also the payment of $1,000 to said 
Guy L. Shaw on October 23, 1920?—A. Those reports show to my certain 
knowledge that contributions, respectively, of $1,000 and $1,000 were made to 
Mr. Shaw, but as to the exact dates, and not having the reports before me, I 
can not say as to the dates. But those reports are here on hie in the office 
downstairs. 

Q. Air. Page, I notice that you say that Mr. Guy L. Shaw hie 1 this state¬ 
ment of campaign expenses with you on or about December 27, 1920.—A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. I have here a copy of the answer served by contestee, Mr. Shaw, on the 
contestant, Henry T. Rainey, dated February 23, 1921, in which it is stated 
that, and taking this in quotation from paragraph five of the answer—“ and he 
further avers that said sums so contributed were actually and lawfully used 
and expended in said campaigns, as will more fully appear from his affidavit 
and copies hied with the Clerk of the House on January 31, 1920—express 
reference being made thereto for the purposes hereafter.” Do you know, Mr. 
Page, if there was hied with you such statement on the date which I have 
just read to you?—A. As I said a while ago, I am not sure of the date, but 
that can be easily ascertained. I may be incorrect in stating December 27— 
perhaps I am. It may have been the date you .just mentioned. I can readily 
verify one or the other according to the fact by sending downstairs and getting 
the particular document in question. Shall I do that? 


12 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. I would like that the date be verified and the correct date be put in at this 
time. 

Mr. Page. I identify the dates as October 8. 1920, and October 23, 1920. 

Cross-examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. Mr. Page, you refer to the fact that some time after the expiration of the 
time required by acts of Congress Mr. Shaw filed in your office an affidavit, 
together with what purported to be copies of reports of receipts and expendi¬ 
tures. You state that two reports were filed, one for before and one for after 
the general election, and that only one report was filed concerning the primary 
receipts and expenses?—A. That is correct. 

Q. Let me ask whether you recall whether the primary reports filed con¬ 
sisted of two parts, and purport to report all expenditues both before and after 
the primary?—A. That is true. The usual form prescribed by this office was not 
used in rendering that statement. 

Q. You state these reports were not received at your office within the times 
limited by the acts of Congress?—A. Y^es. sir. 

Q. Of course, you would have no knowledge as to whether they were made or 
not or posted with the post office for carriage to you?—A. I would have no 
knowledge of that, except it were brought to my attention that such statements 
were alleged to have been mailed by registered mail and because of their non¬ 
receipt here the receipt given by the person in my office, if they were received 
here, would be sought. 

Q. In other words, they would be traced?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, Mr. Page, I believe I am correct in saying that the affidavit filed by 
Mr. Shaw does not purport to have registered these reports, but simply to have 
deposited them in the mails without registration?—A. That is correct. 

Q. Is it unusual, Mr. Page, that reports should be made under this act which 
are not registered to your office?—A. I have not kept any accurate computation 
or record of the number of reports received by registered mail and the number 
of reports received in ordinary mail. But my obsevation leads me to believe 
that the greater number of reports received by me during the last campaign 
which passed over my desk—some 3.500 all told—the greater number were not 
registered. 

Q. The files of your office now contain these copies referred to as filed by Mr. 
Shaw with his affidavit?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Direct examination continued by Mr. McCarron : 

Q. Mr. Page, I call your attention, please, to Public Law No. 298, approved 
August 23. 1912, a copy of which I have here, and ask you if it is not stated in 
that law, which is an amendment of the act of 1911, that the campaign state¬ 
ments, in order to be filed, must be deposited in a regular post office and must be 
duly registered? 

Mr. Mumford. Contestee objects to the question, because the provision is 
entirely directory and is not mandatory, nor material at all to the issues in this 
case. 

Mr. McCarron. But it does, Mr. Mumford, specifically state that in order to 
constitute a filing under the law that these conditions must be complied with 
as set forth in the act. 

Mr. Mumford. Well, the act shows what the provisions are, of course. 

A. I am constrained to answer that question in the negative, because 
upon a reading of the provision in question it states every statement herein 
required shall be verified by oath or affirmation and directed to the Clerk of 
the House, duly stamped and registered, within the time required herein, and 
shall be deemed a sufficient filing of any such statement—shall be deemed a 
sufficient filing of any such statement—under any of the provisions of this act. 
I have always taken that to mean, where the question should be raised, that 
the postmark upon such registered matter would determine whether it were 
filed in time—within the time prescribed by law. 

Q. But is it not a fact that in the campaign statement forms it is pre¬ 
scribed in such forms that the depositing of this statement in a regular post 
office, directed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, duly stamped 
and registered, within the time above required, refers to the paragraph above 
that which states that the statement must be filed within 15 days and not 
less than 10 days, and that within the time above required, is a sufficient filing 
of the statement? 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


13 


Mr. Mumford. I object to that, because it is not the best evidence. The 
document itself will show. 

Mr. McCarron. That paragraph which is set forth in these statements states 
that the statement must be deposited in a regular post office, directed to the 
Clerk of the House of Representatives, duly stamped and registered, within 
the time above required, in order to constitute a filing. 

Mr. Mumford. Contestee objects, because it is not the best evidence and is 
wholly immaterial. 

Mr. McCarron. The contestant will let that question stand. The law itself 
speaks in regard to that. 

Cross-examination continued by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. Can you state, Mr. Page, what is your practice in this office with refer¬ 
ence to the filing date which you place upon these reports of receipts and 
expenditures? That is to say, do you file them as of the date they are received 
at your office or as of the date they are deposited with the United States 
mail?—A. I might answer that question by stating that we file them both 
ways. If, for instance, a statement is received wholly within the time pre¬ 
scribed by law, we mark the date of its receipt on the paper. If it is received 
subsequently to the time prescribed by law. we examine the postmark, whether 
it be registered or not. to determine the date of its mailing, and then stamp 
upon the document the date of its actual receipt and file the envelope with 
the statement. 

Q. The practice of your office. Mr. Page, and assuming that the date of 
filing is the date of depositing in the post—it is, as I understand, the practice of 
your office to accept that as the date of filing?—A. Yes. It seems to be the 
spirit of the law, although I have no judicial functions under the law—they 
are purely ministerial—I can not help but be the receptacle under the law in 
the most reasonable and common-sense fashion that I can employ. 

Q. I believe there is no doubt that your assumption is according to the legal 
effect of depositing these things in the post?—A. I.can not say what the legnl 
effect would be, because, as I say, I have no legal functions under the law. I 
am merely the repository of these things, and I aim to treat all matters coming 
under my notice with equal fairness and consideration. 

Direct examination continued by Mr. McCarron : 

The Witness (after examining paper). It appears that the date, according 
to our stamp, is January 31, 1920. 

Q. Will you identify the paper, Mr. Page, for the record?—A. Yes, sir. It 
is an affidavit of Guy L. Shaw, subscribed to on the 31st day of January, 1921, 
before T. J. Enright, a notary public in the District of Columbia, whose com¬ 
mission expires October 22, 1925. That is one paper. 

Q. Will you please state just what the gist of that affidavit is?—A. That Guy 
L. Shaw was a candidate for nomination as the Republican nominee for Repre¬ 
sentative in Congress from the twentieth district of Illinois at the primary 
election on the 15th day of September, 1920, and that he was chosen as such 

nominee. ' 

Q. May I ask if the affidavit which Mr. Page has, in order to shorten the 
question," purports to be an affidavit setting forth the campaign expenditures 
of Guy L. Shaw as filed by him on January 31, 1921?—A. My answer is, yes, 
sir; but I notice that I acknowledged the receipt to Mr. Shaw rather suc¬ 
cinctly: “This is to acknowledge receipt to-day, January 31, 1921, from your 
hands, of your affidavit and the exhibits mentioned therein, concerning the re¬ 
ceipts and expenditures as Representative, twentieth congressional district of 
Illinois, which will be duly filed in this office as required by the Federal cam¬ 
paign contribution laws.” The exhibits referred to consist of what appears to 
be a copy of primary expenses prior to September 5, 1920, showing a total 
expenditure of $546.34, and of primary expenses prior to September 30, 1920, 
and after September 5, 1920, showing a total of $36.25. Also three letters pur- 
porting to be copies of letters addressed to me under dates of September 22, 
1999 October 24, 1920, and December 2. 1920, in each of which letters it is 
stated that affiant is sending herewith itemized list of money expended in the 
1920 primary campaign to and including October 24, 1920, and from October 24, 
1920, to December 2, 1920. That appears to be all. 

Mr. Mumford examines affidavit and exhibits. 

Mr. McCarron. That is all, Mr. Page. 


14 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Cross-examination by Mr. Mumford: 

Q. Mr. Page, if I understand you correctly, you state that on the 31st day of 
January, 1921, this contestee tiled in your office an affidavit setting forth the 
dates on which he had made and filed in the post office at Beardstown three 
separate reports of receipts and expenditures connected with his primary and 
general election campaigns in the twentieth district?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And with that affidavit were filed exact copies of three reports, one 
covering the ante and post primary expenses and one covering the principal 
election receipts and expenditures, and they were filed with the affidavit?— 
A. Yes, sir. They were all filed on January 31, 1921. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Wm. Tyler Page. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5tli day of March, 1921. 

[seal.] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 

Mr. McCarron. I would like to recall Mr. Rainey. 

Examination by Mr. McCarron : 

Q. Mr. Rainey, you have heard the testimony of Mr. Page, and I will ask 
you if you have had any notice of the affidavit and purported copies of the 
campaign statements filed with the affidavit of Mr. Shaw, dated January 31, 
1921?—A. No. My last conversation with Mr. Page on the subject was on the 
15th of this month, in which I told him we were going to take his testimony, 
and asked his permission to take the testimony in his office. He told me none 
of these statements had been filed and the> were not filed at that time. The 
only notice I have ever had that the statements had been filed are the state¬ 
ments now made by Mr. Page, in which he testified they were filed on January 
31, 1921—about two weeks after issuing this notice. No answer was ever 
served on me, unless the one tendered this morning was an answer to my notice 
of contest. 

Q. It is your idea that the answer filed to your notice of contest was not 
properly filed within the time required, by the statute?—A. It has not been filed 
at all; neither has it been served on me, except that just prior to the beginning 
of this testimony Mr. Mumford handed me a paper, with the statement, “ We 
tender you now this answer to your notice of contest.” 

Cross-examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. Is it your idea, Mr. Rainey, that either the law or the practice requires 
that the answer should be served on you?—A. Yes, sir; I think so. 

Q. Haven’t you had any notice, direct or indirect, that this affidavit of Jan¬ 
uary 31, 1921, had been filed by Mr. Shaw until to-day?—A. No, sir. 

Q. You have not examined the files of the Clerk of the House since the 15th 
of January on that subject?—A. No. I did not make any inquiry then. My 
conversation with Mr. Page with reference to using his room was about the 
15th of February, and evidently I was in error a moment ago as to that being 
the time when he told me there was nothing from Mr. Shaw on file. The con¬ 
versation must have been prior to that time. But I had a conversation with 
Mr. Page some time in January on the subject prior to the filing. 

Q. Mr. Rainey, the last conversation, which you refer to, with the Clerk of 
the House occurred about the 15th of February, 1921, is not the conversation, 
then, in which Mr. Page said that nothing had been filed bv the contestee^— 
A. No. 

Q. You made no inquiry?—A. I made no inquiry and neither was I advised. 

I simply discussed the question of taking testimony in this room. When Mr. 
Page told me nothing had been filed, that was the middle of January and before 
the 31st of January, when the affidavit was filed. 

Henry T. Rainey. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this Ttli day of March. 1921. 

[seal.] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


15 


Whereupon Mr. Mumford recalled Mr. Page. 

Examination by Mr. Mumford: 

Q. Mr. Page, in fairness to yourself and Mr. Rainey, I wish you would make 
whatever statement you have to make concerning the conversation with Mr. 
Rainey on the 15th of February, and any notice to Mr. Rainey as to the tiling 
of this affidavit and exhibits on the 31st of January.—A. The conversation 
with Mr. Rainey on the 15tli of February related wholly to the taking of testi¬ 
mony in my office, at which time 1 said that I should be glad to have it taken 
there, including my own testimony. No reference whatever was made to 
whether or not any statement of tiie contestee had been tiled since a former 
conversation, some time in January, that I had with Mr. Rainey. And during 
the conversation of February I did not deem it my duty to apprise Mr. Rainey 
of the fact that Mr. Shaw had filed in the Clerk's office a statement of receipts 
and expenditures on January 31. In fact, at the time of our conversation 1 
did not think of that matter at all. I should like to state also that the cam¬ 
paign contribution laws do not require the Clerk to notify anybody, either 
verbally or in writing, of the tiling of any statements thereunder, and that 
such statements are required by the law to remain on the tiles in this office for 
15 months after the general election, during which time they may be inspected 
by whomsoever desires to see them. 

Q. And, Mr. Clerk, the affidavits and exhibits in this case have in fact been 
tiled in your office and subject to public inspection at all times since they were 
tiled, on the 31st of January?—A. Yes, sir. 

Wm. Tyler Page. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5tli day of March, 1921. 

[seal.] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Cfolumhia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 

Whereupon, Mr. T. C. MEEKER, being present, was duly sworn by me as a 
witness in the above matter to testify to the truth and nothing but the truth, 
and he testified as follows: 

Examination by Mr. McCarron : 

Q. Please state your full name, your address, and your occupation?—A. T. C. 
Meeker, 1419 North Carolina Avenue NE., chief clerk of the National Repub¬ 
lican Congressional Committee. 

Q. What are your duties as chief clerk of the Republican National Con¬ 
gressional Committee?—A. I am assistant to the secretary and look after all 
the detail work of the office. 

Q. What does that consist of?—A. I have charge of the sending out of 
speeches and documents, take care of the tiles and card indexes, and have full 
charge of all the girls doing clerical work; look after the letters and state¬ 
ments we get out, meet people who come in, and so on. 

Q. As chief clerk of the Republican National Congressional Committee, is it 
one of your duties, Mr. Meeker, to inform the respective candidates for Repre¬ 
sentative in Congress that they shall tile campaign statements before and after 
the election?—A. Since Dr. Fess has been chairman that duty has been wholly 
mine. After the nom nations are made in the primaries we send out a blank 
form, and after the general election we send out two blanks, one not less than 
10 nor more than 15 days before the election and one 30 days after the election. 

Q. Were you chief clerk of the Republican National Congressional Committee 
during the 'months of August, September. October, November, and December, 
1920?—A. l r es, sir. 

Q. Did you before the general election which took place November 2, 1920, 
send any campaign statement forms to the Republican nominees for Representa¬ 
tive in Congress in the various congressional districts of the country?—A. I 
endeavored to send them to every one. 

Q. Have you, in accordance with the subpoena duces tecum served upon you, 
brought with you a certain letter dated October 11, 1920, addressed by the Re¬ 
publican National Congressional Committee to all Republican nominees for 
Representative in Congress to be voted on at the general election held Novem¬ 
ber 2. 1920, and copies of the forms for making reports of all expenses of said 
nominees for Representative which accompanied the said letter?—A. Yes, sir. 


16 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Will you kindly produce that letter and those forms?—A. There is the 
letter and the forms. 

Q. Will you please read that letter?—A. October 11, 1920. Dear Mr. --—• 

I am mailing to you, under another cover, two blanks for your use in reporting 
your campaign expenses to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, Wash¬ 
ington, D. C. You will find a copy of the law printed on the back of each 
blank, and it is important that you closely observe all provisions of the law. 
Please note that one statement should be filed before the November election, and 
the other after the election. With best wishes for your success, permit me to 
remain, with kindest regards, sincerely, yours,-, chairman. 

Q. Please state, Mr. Meeker, if that is an exact copy of a letter that was sent 
to all Republican nominees for Representative in Congress in the United States 
prior to the general election of November 2, 1920; and in addition to that also 
if the forms for filing campaign statements which you have in your hand accom¬ 
panied the said letter of October 11, 1920?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. McCarron. I desire at this point to offer as “ Contestant’s Exhibit F ” the 
said copy of the letter of October 11, 1920, together with the forms as presented 
by Mr. Meeker. 

Mr. Mumford. That is objected to by the contestee as wholly immaterial. 

Mr. McCarron. Please state just how this letter and forms were mailed to 
each nominee. 

A. The way we do there is as soon as an official list of nominees comes out, 
which Mr. Page gets out, I take that directory, pick out all Republican nominees 
of each State, and put one of each of the blanks into a large envelope; then the 
letters are run off and put into another envelope and addressed from this list 
of Mr. Page’s, and each are attached together and checked off by a duplicate 
check and then mailed. 

Q. Did you mail a letter similar to the copy which you have, dated October 11, 
1920, together with the forms for the filing of campaign statements before and 
after the general election to Mr. Guy I.. Shaw, Republican nominee for Repre¬ 
sentative in Congress from the twentieth district of Illinois, at Beardstown, 
Ill.?—A. I can not say positively that I mailed one to Mr. Shaw. To the best of 
my recollection I think I mailed one to every Republican nominee. I am quite 
sure, but I am not positive. I endeavored to mail one to every Republican 
nominee. 

Q. There would be no reason why you should not mail the letter and forms 
to Mr. Shaw?—A. No. 

Cross-examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. You haven’t any independent recollection of mailing the letter and forms 
to this particular candidate?—A. No, sir. 

Q. You simply say that it was the practice and custom to do this thing and 
believe that it was done?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Mr. McCarron. I desire to state that the contestant has finished with his 
testimony for to-day under the notice which was served upon the contestee, 
dated February 14, 1921. 

T. C. Meeker. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of March, 1921. 

Lseal.] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 

I, Charles E. Gebhardt, a notary public in and for the District of Columbia, 
do hereby certify that pursuant to a certain notice dated February 14, 1921, the 
original of which is hereto attached (marked “Exhibit E”), on the 23d day of 
February, 1921, at the office of William Tyler Page, Clerk of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives of the United States, in the Capitol Building, in the city of Wash¬ 
ington, D. C., at 10 o’clock a. m., I proceeded with the taking of depositions on 
behalf of Henry T. Rainey, contestant in the matter of the contested election of 
a Representative in Congress for the twentieth congressional district of the 
State of Illinois, and that I then and there took the depositions of the said 
Henry T. Rainey, contestant; William Tyler Page, Clerk of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives; and T. C. Meeker. 

And I do further certify that Henry T. Rainey, William Tyler Page, and 
T. C. Meeker, the witnesses before named, personally known to "me and known 





RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


17 


by me to be Henry T. Rainey, William Tyler Page, ami T. C. Meeker, being 
present, were by me duly sworn to depose the truth in answer to such questions 
as may be propounded to them by counsel, and that they gave the foregoing tes¬ 
timony as exhibited on pages 1 to 31, inclusive, of the manuscript hereto 
attached; that the foregoing testimony was by me personally taken down steno¬ 
graphic^ Uy at the time and place above mentioned and by me personally reduced 
to writing; and that the said testimony was read by the respective witnesses 
after being so reduced to writing, in my presence, and was subscribed and sworn 
to in my presence on the dates certified to by me opposite their respective 
signatures. 

And I do certify further that the papers and documents hereto attached and 
marked for identification “ Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F,” respectively, are the 
identical papers which were introduced in evidence during the taking of the said 
testimony. 

Witness my hand and seal at the city of Washington, D. C., this 7th day of 
March, 1921. * 

[ seal. ] Charles E. Gebhardt, 

. Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires December 4, 1921. 


Exhibit A. 


December 16, 1920. 


Hon. Guy L. Shaw, 

Beardstoicn, III. 

Dear Sir: 1 inclose two copies of notice of my intention to contest your elec¬ 
tion and ask that you acknowledge service on one of them and return it to me in 
the inclosed envelope. This may save some cost and may also expedite the 
matter. 

Very respectfully, 

Henry T. Rainey. 


Exhibit R. 

[Post Office Department. Official business. Registered article, No. 221631. Insured parcel.] 

Postmark of delivering office and date of delivery, Beard.stown, December 20, 
1920, 12.30 p. m. 

H. T. Rainey, House of Representatives, United States, Washington, D. C. 


RETURN RECEIPT. 

Received from the postmaster the registered or insured article, the original 
number of which appears on the face of this card. 

Guy L. Shaw. 

Date of delivery, December 20, 1920. 

(Exhibit C.—Notice of contest, omitted in printing.) 


Exhibit D. 

State of Illinois, 

Office of the Secretary of State, 

Sprin(/field , January 26, 1921. 

Hon. Henry T. Rainey, 

House of Representatives , Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: Replying to your favor of the 24th instant, beg to ad\ise that the 
State canvassing board completed the canvass of the votes cast at the geneial 
election on December 1. 1920, and the governor’s proclamation was issued as 

of the Same date. 

, Very truly, yours, 

Louis I,. Emmerson, 

Secretary of State. 

46991—21-2 • 





18 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Exhibit E. 

State of Illinois, 

Countu of Cass, ss: 

W. H. Dieterich, being duly sworn, on oatli deposes and says tliat he was 
unable, upon diligent search, to find the said Guy L. Shaw, and that he served 
a notice, of which the attached is a true and perfect copy, by delivering the 
same to Mrs. Bessie D. Shaw, the wife of Guy L. Shaw, at the residence of 
the said Guy L. Shaw, at No. 213 West Third Street, in the city of Beardstown, 
Cass County, Ill., on the 16tli day of February, A. D. 1921, at the hour of 2 
o’clock p. m. of said day. 

W. H. Dieterich. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16tli day of February, A. D. 1921. 
[seal.] E. Miller Dunn, 

Notar a Public. 


My commission expires on 17th day of June, 1923. 


Washington, 1). C., Februa.ru V/, 1921. 

Guy L. Shaw, 

Beardstown , III, 

Sir: Please take notice that on the 23d day of February, 1921, at the hour of 
10 a. in., at the office of the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, 
at the Capitol Building, Washington, D. C., the deposition of Hon. William 
Tyler P?'ge. Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, Washington, 
D. C.; T. E. Meeker, 701 Albee Building, Washington, D. C.; Hon. John Hol¬ 
lingsworth, (Mi ef Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, Wash¬ 
ington, D. C.; Hon. Simeon D. Fess, United States House of Representatives, 
Washington, D. C.; Hon. Henry T. Rainey, United States House of Repre¬ 
sentatives, Washington, D. C., in. this cause will be taken before Charles E. 
Gebhardt, Esq., Wilkins Building, Washington, D. C., a notary public for the 
District of Columbia, under the provisions of section 107 of the act of January 
10. 1873, and section 2 of the act of March 2, 1875, Revised Statutes. Taking 
of testimony will continue from day to day until completed. Please govern 
yourself accordingly. 

W. H. Dieterich, 

John F. McCarron, 

Attorneys for Henri/ T. Rainey , Contestant. 


Exhibit F. 

National Republican Congressional Committee, 

Washington, 1). C., October II. 1920. 

Dear Mr. —-: I am mailing to you, under another cover, two blanks 

for your use in reporting your campaign expenses to the Clerk of the House 
of Representat ves, Washington, D. C. You will find a copy of the law printed 
on the back of each blank, and it is important that you closely observe all pro¬ 
visions of the law. 

Please note that one statement should be filed before the November election 
and the other after the election. 

With best wishes for your success, permit me to remain, with kindest 
regards. 

Sincerely, yours, 


Chairman. 

(Exhibits F2 and F3, publicity statements for filing before general election 
and after general election, omitted in printing.) 

(Note. —Testimony taken at Beardstown, Ill., February 25. 1921, and testimony 
taken at Springfield, Ill., February 25, 1921. was rece.ved by the Clerk of the 
House and by him opened in the presence of attorney for contestant and in the 
presence of contestee. Disagreement arising as to the printing of this testi¬ 
mony, respectively, the Clerk exercising the authority conferred by law to deter- 
m.ne the question, decided to omit said testimony from the printed record. 






RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


19 


Attorney for contestant entered objection to the action of the Clerk. The 
original copy of the testimony so excluded was replaced in the original con¬ 
tainers, and is transmitted to the Committee on Elections, together with the 
pr.nted testimony, pursuant to law. 

The ground upon which the Clerk excluded this testimony from the printed 
record on objection of contestee was that under section 108, Revised Statutes, 
sufficient time was not allowed contestee or his attorney to attend at the times 
and places stated in the notices, nor to prepare for the taking of this testi¬ 
mony, and that notice for taking of the testimony at Springfield, Ill., was not 
served upon him. Contestee and his attorney were present in the city of Wash¬ 
ington, D. C., in the office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives, on 
February 23, 1921, at which time and place testimony in behalf of contestant was 
adduced. It seemed to the Clerk that in view of the contestee’s objection to the 
printing of the testimony in question for the reasons stated should be sustained, 
and that whether or not such testimony should be considered as a part of the 
record would be properly considered and decided by the Committee on Elections.) 

DEPOSITIONS TAKEN ON BEHALF OF CONTESTEE. 

The depos'tions of the witnesses, Guy L. Shaw, Roy L. Phelps, G. W. Morton, 
E. T. Hunter, .T. E. Haywood, Dick Spicker, sworn and examined at the direc¬ 
tors' room in the Beardstown State Bank, at the city of Beardstown, in Cass 
County. Ill., on Saturday, April 2, A. D. 1921, pursuant to the notice attached 
as contestee’s Exhibit 1, to be used and read on behalf of the contestee, in the 
election contest of Henry T. Rainey, contestant, v. Guy L. Shaw, contestee, in 
contest of the election of a Representative of and from the twentieth congres¬ 
sional district of the State of Illinois, at the general election held on Novem¬ 
ber 2, A. D. 1920. The taking and certifying of the attached depositions was 
continued from day to day from and after April 2, 1921, to the day of certifi¬ 
cate hereto attached. 

The said witnesses were severally sworn by the undersigned notary public 
to state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so far as they 
should be severally interrogated, and each of said witnesses severally signed 
and swore to his evidence hereto attached. 

Appearances: Hon. Guy L. Shaw, contestee; William Mumford, his attorney; 
Hon. Henry T. Rainey, contestant; W. H. Dieterich, his attorney. 

Before D. M. Maney, Esq., notary public. 

GUY L. SHAW, the contestee herein, having been called in his own behalf, 
having been duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford, and testified 
as follows: 

Q. What is your name?—A. Guy L. Shaw. 

Q. Are you the contestee, or respondent, in this proceeding?—A. I am. 

Q. Do you hold and have you held the certificate of the secretary of state 
certifying to your nomination as Republican candidate for Congress in the 
twentieth district of Illinois?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. On what day did the election occur?—A. November 2, 1920. 

Q. About what was the majority which the returns showed you received?— 
A. Between 3,900 and 4,000. 

Q. How many counties comprise this congressional district?—A. Ten. 

q And in a general way, where are these counties located in the State of 
Illinois?—A. The west central part of Illinois, lying along the Illinois River. 
Quite a number of the counties are adjacent to the river. 

Q. Do you happen to know what the population of this district is?—A. I do 
not recall now. 

Q. What has heretofore been the normal political complexion of all of the 
counties in the twentieth congressional district.’ 1 A. Strongly Democratic. 

q Has it been true that in former years every county was Democratic?— 

A Yes sir. * 

Q. What was the political result of the election in the district on the 2d of 

November, 1920, on Representative in Congress?—A. A Republican was elected. 

Q. And how many counties were carried by yourself and how many by Mr. 
Rainey?—A. I think 8 of the 10 counties by myself and 2 by Mr. Rainey. 

Q. One of these counties carried by Mr. Rainey was his own county of 

Greene and the other was Brown?—A. Yes, sir. , T ., • , 

Q. Do you remember the date of the primaries in this district?—A. I think 

September 15, 1920. 


20 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


Q. From the time the' result of that primary was made known and the cer¬ 
tificate issued of your nomination, did you or did you not actively engage in the 
election campaign?—A. I did. 

Q. In a general way, what did you do? Did you go out in the district 
yourself?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Into every county?—A. Every county except one, and I was in that 
county but really did not make much of a campaign. 

Q. What county was that?—A. Scott. 

Q. In addition to your own activities in that respect, did you have any other 
persons who went out in the district in your interests?—A. I did. 

Q. Did you give notice of the taking of these depositions here to-day, or direct 
your attorney to give that notice?—A. I did. 

Mr. Mumfoed (to reporter). Mark this paper “ Contestee's Exhibit No. 1.” 

(Paper marked “ Contestee's Exhibit No. 1” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumfoed. You may look at Exhibit .No. 1 and state if that is the notice 
you directed to be given in this matter. 

A. It is. 

Q. That is the copy of notice served on Judge Dieterich, the attorney for the 
contestant?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you desire to have that notice attached to your deposition as an 
exhibit?—A. Yes, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 1,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Q. Did you direct that copies of that notice be sent to the contestant, Mr. 
Rainey?—A. I did. 

Q. By registered mail, from Pittsfield?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumfoed (to reporter). Mark this “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 2.” 

(Paper marked “ Contestee’s Exhibit No. 2” for identification.) 

Q. You may look at Exhibit No. 2 and state if that purports to be a receipt 
from Mr. Rainey for the registered package referred to.—A. It does. 

Q. Do you desire to have that attached to your deposition?—A. l T es, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 2,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Mumfoed (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee's Exhibit No. 3.” 

(Paper marked “Contestee's Exhibit No. 3,” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumfoed. You may state if that purports to be and is a copy of the 
notice of the taking of these depositions, served on one of the contestant’s 
attorneys in Washington. 

A. It is. 

Q. Do you desire that attached to the deposition?—A. Yes, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 3,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Mumfoed (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee's Exhibit No. 4.” 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 4,” for identification.) 

Q. Kindly state if that is the subpoena you directed to be issued with proofs 
of service on witnesses to be examined to-day.—A. It is. 

Q. l r ou wish that to be attached?—A. Yes, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 4,’’ is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Mumfoed. Where have you recently been, Mr. Shaw? That is to say, you 
have been away from home recently?—A. I have. 

Q. For what purpose did you come back at this time?—A. For the purpose of 
taking depositions in this case. 

Q. When did you leave Beardstown?—A. On the evening of the 30th, the night 
of the 30th. 

Q. When had you gone to Washington on the occasion of your late residence 
there?—A. I started on Sunday afternoon, the Sunday afternoon prior to the 
23d. 

Q. Twenty-third of what?—A. February, 1921. 

Q. For what reason,or purpose did you go to Washington at that time?—A. 
Because of having been served with a notice of the taking of depositions in 
Washington on that day. 

Q* were notified by Mr. Rainey of—or his attorney, were you, that 
depositions would be taken by his attorney in Washington on the 23d of Feb¬ 
ruary?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you went pursuant to that notice?—A. I did. 




RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


21 


Mr. Mumford (to reporter). Mark this paper “ Contestee’s Exhibit No. 5.” 

(Paper marked “ Cont.estee’s Exhibit No. 5.” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumford. You may look at Exhibit 5 and state if that is the notice of 
the taking: of depositions in Washington, signed by Judge Dietericli. to which 
you have just referred. 

A. It is. 

Q. We desire to have that go into the record. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 5,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Mumford. Now, Mr. Shaw, when did you say you left Beardstown to go 
to Washington, pursuant to that notice just introduced in evidence? 

A. On Sunday before the day—on Sunday before the 23d. 

Q. What, if anything, occurred in Beardstown just before you left to go to 
Washington to attend to the taking of depositions?—A. On Saturday after¬ 
noon, late in the afternoon before the Sunday on which I left. I was served 
with a notice to take depositions in Beardstown on the same case on—I think 
the date was the 25th. 

Mr. Mumford (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 6.’’ 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 6,” for Identification.) 

Mr. Mumford. You may look at Exhibit 0> and state if that is the notice 
Judge Pieterich served on you in that behalf. 

A. It is. 

Q. Do you desire to offer it?—A. Y"es, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 6,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings. 

Mr. Mumford. Had you been advised, Mr. Shaw, that Mr. Rainey’s deposi¬ 
tion was to be taken in Washington on the 23d, on the occasion referred to? 

A. Yes; I had been notified; yes, sir. 

Q. Did you regard it as important, that you should be present in Washington 
when Mr. Rainey’s deposition was taken?—A. I did. 

Q. You regarded it as necessary, and were so advised?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Notwithstanding that notice to take depositions here on the 25th, you 
went, to Washington?—A. I did. 

Q. Did you do that out of any discourtesy or defiance of the proceedings to 
take depositions here?—A. No, sir. 

Mr. Mumford (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 7.” 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit. No. 7” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumford. When you received the notice marked as Exhibit G did you 
send any communication to Judge Pieterich with reference to taking of deposi¬ 
tions? 

A. I did. I went straight home and studied over the matter and decided to 
write this letter. 

Q. And is the exhibit which you hold in your hand a copy of the letter which 
you wrote to him?—A. It is. 

Q. Do you desire to have that offered?—A. I do. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 7,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Mumford. Do you know personally whether these depositions were taken 
on the 25th? 

A. I do not. 

Q. Who is your attorney in the conduct of this contest?—A. William Mum¬ 
ford, of Pittsfield, Ill. 

Q. Was he or was he not with you in Washington on the taking of depositions 
on the 23d?—A. He was. 

Q. Was he or could he have been in Beardstown on the 25th?—A. He could 
not have been. 

Q. Have you at any time filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
reports of receipts and expenditures of campaign contributions under the act of 
Congress requiring those reports to be made?—A. I have. 

Mr. Mumford (to reporter). Mark this paper “ Contestee’s Exhibit No. 8. 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 8” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumford. Who is the Clerk of the House of Representatives? 

A. William Tyler Page. 

Q. You may look at Exhibit 8 and state if that is the receipt you hold from 
the Clerk of the House for the filing of these reports required by law—A. It is. 

Q. You desire to offer that in evidence?—A. Yes, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 8,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 


22 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Mr. Dieterich. We want tlie notary to note an objection to Oontestee’s Ex¬ 
hibit No. 8, for the reason that it does not show that the reports were filed at 
the time they are required to be tiled by the act of Congress. 

Mr. Mttmford. You had received notice from the contestant, had you not,, 
that he would contest your election? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With 11 specifications in the notice?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you at any time serve upon the contestant an answer to the notice 
of contest of election?—A. I did. 

Mr. Mumfokd (to reporter). Mark these papers “ Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 
9a, 9b, and 9c.” 

(Papers marked “Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 9a, 9b, and 9c.”) 

Mr. Mttmford. You may look at Exhibits 9a. 9b, and 9c, which I now hand 
you, and state whether they are copies of the reports which you filed with 
the Clerk of the House of Representatives and which are referred to in Mr. 
Tyler Page’s receipt already offered. 

Air. Dieterich. We want to make an objection to this, for the same reason 
stated as an objection to Exhibit No. 8, that it doesn’t show that they were 
filed at the time they are required to be filed by the act of Congress. 

Mr. Mttmford (to witness). Answer the question. 

A. They are copies; yes, sir. 

Q. Do you desire to offer in evidence in this regard these exhibits?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

(Which said papers, marked “Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 9a, 9b, and 9c,” are 
attached to this transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Dieterich. We want to note objections to the offering of contestee’s 
Exhibits Nos. 9a, 9b, and 9c, for the reason that they do not show that they 
were sworn to as required by the act of Congress, and that they purport to 
state that they were mailed—Exhibit 9b on October 24, 1920, and 9c on De¬ 
cember 2, 1920. There is no evidence and no statement of any receiving officer 
that they were mailed on that day. The further objection that they are not 
in compliance with the provisions of the act of Congress requiring statements 
of receipts and expenditures of election of candidates for Congress and others. 

Mr. Mttmford. Were, in fact, these Exhibits 9a, 9b, and 9c sworn to when 
they were filed by you with the Clerk of the House? 

The Witness. They were. 

Q. These are merely copies which omit the verification from the copies?— 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Otherwise they are true copies, are they?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q» Did you at any time serve notice on Mr. Rainey of your answer to his 
notice of contest?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mttmford (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 10.” 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 10” for identification.) 

Mr. Mttmford. Is Exhibit 10, which you hold in your hand, a true copy of 
the notice served on Mr. Rainey? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You saw it, did you, in the office of the Clerk of the House of Representa¬ 
tives, in Washington?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You desire to have it attached to your deposition?—A. l T es, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 10,” is attached to 
this transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Dieterich. We object to the admission of contestee’s Exhibit No. 10 for 
the reason that it was not filed or served on contestant within the time re¬ 
quired by the act of Congress for the answer in proceedings of this kind. It 
was not served until the time was set for taking of depositions. 

Mr. Mumford. Go back a moment, Mr. Shaw, to the depositions that were 
probably taken in Beardstown here on the 25th of February. Do you object to 
the receipt and consideration of those depositions by the committee? 

A. Y T es, sir; I do. 

Q. Do you propose to move, at the proper time and in the proper way, to sup¬ 
press the depositions for the reasons indicated?—A. I do. 

Mr. Mumford. I would like to make a statement here. I want to say that 
Judge Dieterich here has advised me that under Mr. Rainey’s dire tion he will 
furnish me a copy of the evidence taken on the occasion referred to here and will 
recall the witnesses and consent that I cross-examine these witnesses. I think 
that will straighten that out, Judge. 

Mr. Dieterich. Yes, sir; that is all right. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


23 


Mr. Mum ford. Now, Mr. Sliaw, you are not a wealthy man, as 1 take it? 

A. No, sir. 

(). You have had occasion to 1'eel the need of money in your life, as many 
other men have? 

Mr. Dieterich. .hist a moment, please. I want to enter objection to those 
questions and answers. 

Mr. Mcmford. Notwithstanding this condition, you have been able to regard 
yourself as an honest man, have you? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I>id you receive any assistance or contributions to your campa'gn fund other 
than those sworn—shown in the reports which you have offered in evidence 
here?—A. I did not. 

(>. They amounted, as 1 believe, to $2,000 received in two equal contributions 
from the national congressional committee?—A. It did. 

(J. As this campaign came on, state br.efiy and approximately how much time 
you personally gave to your campaign out over the district. You needn’t be exact 
about it. I mean the primary and the election campaigns.—A. I spent the 
greater part of my t me in the campaign after the primaries and considerable 
time before. I should say probably two-thirds of my time. 

tj. How did you travel?—A. I traveled by automobile and on the trains. 

Q. Did you have any paid publicity in the newspapers of the district?—A. I 
did. 


(). Did you or did you not employ persons to exert themselves for you and in 
behalf of your candidacy?—A. I did. 

(j. Did you or did you not receive much ass stance which was not paid for at 
all and was not charged for?—A. I did. 

Q. I notice, Mr. Shaw, that in your primary report, to which you have 
referred, you take credit prior to September 5, 1920, for the following items: 
Newspaper announcements, $30; Schnepp & Barnes, printing. $22.50; Buckeye 
Sales Co., mimeograph letters. $150; Chandlerville Times, publicity, $21.60; 
James Livingstone, stenographic work, $11; Buckeye Sales Co., mimeograph 
letters, $280.99; W. J. White, auto hire. $25; and the Dick Spieker Printing Co., 
printing, $12.05, making a total of $546.34. Are those items correct?—A. 
They are. 

Q. Was that money actually spent by you in your primary campaign prior 
to that date?—A. It was. 

<). Was it spent for proper and legitimate campaign expenses—a’l of it?—A. 


It was. 

Q. Was any of it used for any corrupting or illegal purposes?—A. No. sir. 

Q. I notice your primary report, after September 5, shows only three items: 
Spieker Printing Co., printing, $3 50; G. D. Huud, publicity, $15; J. B. Living¬ 
stone, stenographic work, $17.25. Are those items correct?—A. They are. 

Q. Were they actually expended by you for necessary and legitmate work 
in your campaign covering that period?—A. They were. 

q. In your Exhibit 9b. which purports to be the copy of election campaign 
expenditures, aggregating $1,101.85, you itemize here 45 items of expenditure, 
the highest being $180, I believe, and the smallest perhaps being $3, and aggre¬ 
gating $1,101.85, as stated. Are those items correct?—A. They are. 

q were they actually expended by you for the necessary purposes connected 
with your campaign?—A. They were. 

Q. Was any of that money used for corrupt or improper purposes/ A. 


‘ q. i n your exliib t marked 9c you take credit for 29 items of expenditures 
in your election campaign, aggregating $1,921.80. Have you examined carefully 
all the items in both of these election reports?—A. I have. 

O. Are they correct?—A. They are. 

q Were they actually expended in the full amounts named for the pmpo.->e 
indicated?—A. Yes. sir. 

O After the election, Mr. Shaw, did somebody start or institute 
tion of reports in this congressional district calculated to affect 
of your handling of and disposition of campaign contributions?—A 1 bey did. 

6. Did you or did yon not thereupon submit all of your receipts and all of 
your expenditures to* competent persons in Beardstown here for an audit ot 
Vour campaign receipts and expenditures?—A. I did. 

( ) Did those competent persons examine personally your receipts and ex¬ 
penditures and make a report as to what they show?—A. They did. 


the circula¬ 
te honesty 


24 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Mr. Dieterich. We want to enter an objection to this line of questioning as 
not proper or material in the issue of this case. 

Mr. Mumford (to witness). Who is PH. T. Hunter? 

A. He is a resident of Beardstown, Ill., and cashier of the Beardstown State 
Bank. 

Q. Who is Walter B. Myer?—A. He is a business man in the town and 
proprietor of the Myer Hotel, and a Republican committeeman. Also, Mr. 
Hunter is the secretary of the Republican county central committee. 

Q. Who is Roy L. Phelps?—A. He is a resident of Beardstown, a county 
central committeeman, and has a post in the State administration with the 
fish and game department as an inspector. 

Q. Who is J. L. Long?—A. A citizen of Beardstown and a groeeryman. 

Q. Who is IH. H. Schumann?—A. He resides in Beardstown, and is the pro¬ 
prietor of a hardware concern, in partnership with a gentleman by the name 
of Gill ford. 

Q. Who is W. G. Mooney?—A. He also resides in Beardstown. and is 
engaged in the clothing and shoe business. 

Q. Who is F. William Wessel?—A. Citizen of Beardstown engaged in the 
retail business, handling farm implements, repairs, etc. 

Q. E. M. Humphrey?—A. A citizen of Beardstown, and I think connected 
now with the Glenn Ice & Fuel Co. 

Q. Who is E. J. Howard?—A. A citizen of Beardstown, at that time an 
employee of It. C. Shell of the Shell Motor Co., as bookkeeper. 

Q. Pie is now your secretary in Washington?—A. He is. 

Mr. Mumford (to reporter). Mark this paper “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 11.” 

(Paper marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 11” for identification.) 

Mr. Mumford. You may look at Exhibit No. 11 and state if that is a correct 
copy of the report of these auditors of your receipts and expenditures. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You desire that offered?—A. l T es, sir. 

(Which said paper, marked “Contestee’s Exhibit No. 11,” is attached to this 
transcript of proceedings.) 

Mr. Dieterich. I obje t to that as not being competent evidence, noth'ng to 
show what the accounts were when first submitted to this committee, nothing 
to show whether they were the correct accounts, receipts, and expenditures, and 
the instrument purports to be a copy. It 's not the best evidence if the same 
could under any circumstances be competent. 

Mr. Mumford. Mr. Shaw, about how much of your own money, in excess of 
the $2,000 received from the national Republican congressional committee, did 
you actually spend in your campaign for Congressman? 

A. Approximately $900; between $900 and $1,000. 

Q. In addition to this?—A. Yes, sir; that doesn’t cover the primaries. 

Q. That is election expense?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In the notice of contest which was served on you, a copy of which will be 
attached to this deposition, I find there are 11 specifications. Nos. 1. 2, 8. and 4 
charge that you d'd not file with the Clerk of the House of Representatives the 
statements required before and after the primaries and before and after the 
election. Are these the reports to which you have referred as having filed in 
the office of the Clerk of the House?—A. They are. 

Q. So you say you are not guilty of either of these four charges?—A. No. sir. 

Q. The fifth specification, Mr. Shaw, charges that you did not account for 
$1,000 received by you from the Republican national congressional committee 
on the 8th of October, 1920, to be used in your campaign, and the sixth speci¬ 
fication makes a like charge against you on account of $1,000 received by you 
on the 23d of October, 1920, from the same source. Did you in these reports 
account for the $2,000. and is that the same sum which you have charged your¬ 
self with in your reports?—A. Y>s, sir. 

Q. In his seventh specification he charges you did not file any statement ac¬ 
counting for campaign contributions received by you from other sources—other 
sources than the national congressional committee. Is that specification correct 

or is it not? Did you receive any contributions from other sources?_A. I 

did not. 

Q. You know what other sources Mr. Rainey refers to in this specification?_ 

A. I do not. except as gathered from his statement in taking the testimony in 
Washington, in which he referred to the State central committee of Illinois. 

Q. Did you receive any assistance or contribution from the State Republican 
central committee in Illinois?—A. I did not. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


25 


Q. Or from any other committee except the congressional committee?—A. T 
did not. 

Q. In the eighth specification it is charged that you converted to your own use 
a considerable portion of the. moneys received from the congressional committee. 
Are you or are you not subject to that charge?—A. I am not. 

Q. Does the report filed with the Clerk of the House, to which you have 
referred, account for these very items?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The ninth specification states you converted to your own use and did not 
use in your campaign other sums of money contributed from other sources. Did 
you receive any other money from other sources?—A. No, sir. 

Q. His tenth and eleventh specifications, Mr. Shaw, constitute what one might 
consider a trivial explanation. He advises that if you were indicted you will 
incur heavy penalties, etc. Have you, in the answer which you served on Mr. 
Rainey, resented that admonition, and do you deny your guilt?—A. I do. 

Q. Is there any other matter or thing, Mr. Shaw, of which I have not inquired 
now which you wish to state in defense of yourself against this contestant? 
Do you think of anything further?—A. I do not recall anything at present. 

Mr. Mumford. I think that is all, Judge. 

Cross-exam nation by Mr. Dieterich : 

Q. You say the date of the primary election was September 15, 1920. Is that 
•correct?—A. That is the way I remember it. 

Q. You received no contributions for expenses of your primary election?—A. 
No, sir. 

Q. The $2,000 that you state you received from the Republican congressional 
committee were not sent to you for the purpose of defraying any pr'mary expense, 
were they?—A. No, sir. 

Q. They were sent to you for the purpose of assisting you in taking care of 
your expenses at and before the election?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say you filed statements with the Clerk of the House of Representa¬ 
tives at Washington?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you file those statements?—A. The dates are shown in this re¬ 
ceipt which we have had before us awhile ago. 

Q. This receipt of January 31, 1921?—A. That was the date that the reports 
referred to in the receipt were filed. 

Q. Yes; that is the day you filed the statements; is that correct?—A. The 
statements referred to in the receipt. 

Q. I do not understand the receipt, Mr. Shaw. It says: “This is to acknowl¬ 
edge receipt to-day from your hands of your affidavits and expenses mentioned 
therein, concerning rece'pts and expenditures incident to your nomination and 
election as Representative to the Sixty-seventh Congress from the twentieth con¬ 
gressional district of the State of Illinois, which will be duly filed in this office 
as required by the Federal campaign contribution law.” Where are the affidavits 
referred to in this receipt?—A. On file in Washington. 

Q. You haven't any copies of that with you?—A. I think not. 

Q. What are the expenses mentioned in this receipt incident—expenses men¬ 
tioned therein concerning receipts and expenditures?—A. It has reference to 
those copies you hold in your hand. 

Q. It lias reference to contestee’s Exhibits 9a, 9b, and 9c?—A. I presume so. 

Q. I ami saying that to make it clear; 9a, 9b, and 9c purport to be state¬ 
ments—9a of primary expenses prior to September 5; 9b purports to be a state¬ 
ment of campaign expenses?—A. Yes; it refers to those papers you have in 
your hand there? 

Q. And that is the time you filed them?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. You didn’t file them before that time?—A. The original reports were mailed 
prior to that time. 

Q. Were mailed prior to that time? You remember when the original reports 
were mailed?—A. I don’t remember offhand. 

Q. Will you advise us when they were?—A. Yes, sir. One report was mailed 
on October 24, 1920. 

Q. What report was that, do you remember?—A. That was the preelection. 
Wait just a moment and I will give those in order. I think I can do that. 
Now, then, the primary report was mailed on September 22, 1920; the preelection 
report on October 24, i920; the last report on December 2, 1920. 

Q. You say they were mailed, but how? Who mailed the original of which 
contestee’s Exhibit 9a purports to be a copy—that is the primary report, as 
you term it?—A. I did. 


26 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Who prepared that report?—A. I did. 

Q. Did you type it?—A. I presume I did. I didn’t have a stenographer at 
that time. 

Q. And who was that addressed to?—A. The Clerk of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. 

Q. Are you testifying to this from memory or have you data in your pos¬ 
session that refreshes your mind on it?—A. I have carbon copies of letters. 

Q. Will you produce the carbon copies of letters which accompanied con- 
testee’s Exhibit 9a?—A. That is the primary? 

Q. That is the primary report.—A. That was September 22. [Hands copy of 
letter to Mr. Ddeterich.] 

Q. You say you typed this yourself; is that your recollection?—A. That is 
my recollection. 

Q. But you do remember of depositing it in the post office?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have made a search or made inquiry from the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives at Washington, have you?—A. Y T es, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether he had received that?—A. Up to the last time I 
saw him he had not received it. 

Q. When was that?—A. At about the time of the taking of the testimony in 
Washington. 

Q. In 1921, during the month of February, some considerable time after?— 
A. Yes. 

Q. In reference to the expenditures contained in that report, do you know 
how they were made? I mean by cash or check?—A. I think the most of them 
were made by check. 

Q. Where did you carry your account at that time?—A. In a Springfield 
bank. 

Q. What bank in Springfield—A. I think it is called the Ridgely National, 
the Farmers’ Bank. 

Q. The Ridgely Farmers’ State Bank?—A. I think it is. 

Q. You only carried an account at one bank in Springfield?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you carry an account at any other bank?—A. At the Beardstown 
State Bank. 

Q. A checking account?—A. l T es. sir. 

Q. And the account you carried at the Ridgely Farmers’ State Bank was. 
also a checking account?—A. Y T es, sir. 

Q. l T ou never carried any checking account in any other bank, did you, at 
that time?—A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. And that is true all down to December 20; is that correct?—A. I think 
that is correct. 

Q. So the only checking account you carried from the—during September 
and up to December were the accounts you kept in the Ridgely Farmers’ State 
Bank at Springfield, Ill., and the Beardstown State Bank at Beardstown?—A. 
That is as I recall now. 

Q. This statement—is that an exact copy of the original, your Exhibit 9a?— 
A. l T es, sir. 

Q. That is the form it is in?—A. I think it is; yes, sir. 

Q. Was that on the printed form, do you know? Or did you just write it 
on the typewriter as indicated on the copy?—A. I didn’t have the printed 
form ; I presume it was on stationery, the original. 

Q. You were advised it was necessary to make that report?—A. Yes. 

Q. Did you at that time know it was necessary to also make a report of 
your expenditures for campaign purposes before the election?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. And after the primary?—A. Yes, sir. 

0. You were fully advised as to that?—A. I presume I was. 

Q. You knew that had to be made and who that had to be sent to?—A. Yes. 

Q. Did you know the name of the Clerk of the House at that time?—A. I am 
not sure that I did, but I think I did. 

Q. At that time you addressed the letter to William Tyler Page; is that cor¬ 
rect?—A. l T es. 

Q. Do you remember when you first obtained the knowledge that it was 
necessary to do that, Mr. Shaw?—A. l T es, sir. 

Q. When?—A. I can’t give you the date. 

Q. How did you acquire that knowledge; by your own research, by reading 
the statutes yourself, or by being advised by some one?—A. I got it through 
talking with some friends. 

Q. Do you remember who they were?—A. Yes, sir. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


27 


Q. Who were they?—A. Congressman Wheeler was one of them. 

Q. Of Springfield?—A. Yes. 

Q. You were advised at that time it was necessary to make a report of your 
expenditures for the campaign. Did you know when that report had to be 
made; did he advise you?—A. No; lie didn’t advise me. 

Q. You didn’t know whether it should be made before or after the primary?— 
A. I looked the matter up myself. 

Q. And determined that it should be made. Now, calling your attention to 
contestee's Exhibit 9b, when did you say that was made?—Is that the preelec¬ 
tion ? 

Q. The preelection?—A. It was mailed on October 24. 1920. 

Q. Do you testify from memory or do you testify from some memorandum you 
have which refreshes you?—A. Both. 

Q. Will you produce any letter or copy of letter sent with the report?—A. 
A. Yes. sir. f Hands copy of letter to Mr. Dietericli.l 

(>. Who typed this, do you know?—A. No, sir; I can't say. 

Q. At that time did you have a stenographer in your employ?—A. I did. 

Q. Who was he?—A. Well, I wouldn’t swear that I had a stenographer on 
that date. I had some stenographers about that time. Mr. Howard was doing 
most of my work, excepting the mailing of campaign material. 

(>. Was Mr. Howard at that time employed by you as a stenographer?—A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Was there any other stenographer employed by you at that time? I mean 
<>n October 24. 1920.—A. I don’t recall. There is a lady here in town who I 
called on frequently. 

Q. Who is that?—A. M\ss Pearl Nelson. 

Q. Do you remember whether that letter that you say accompanied the state¬ 
ment of your preelection campaign expenses, referred to as Contestee’s Ex¬ 
hibit 9b, was written by yourself, typed by yourself, or by your stenographer?— 
A. Which date is that? 

Q. October 24, 1920.—A. I think that letter was typed by myself on the road 
from Jerseyville. 

Q. You carried a typewr ter with you?—A. A geat deal of the time; yes, sir. 

Q. You think that was typed on your road home from Jerseyville?—A. That 
is my memory. 

Q. Were you in Jerseyville on that day?—A. I think I was about that time. 

Q. How long had you been there?—A. Perhaps that night and day. 

Q. Did you use the typewriter on the train coming home?—A. I think I 
did. I think I started to work in Jerseyville and finished it on the way 
home. 

Q. Was there anyone present with you?—A. Not with me; I was traveling 
alone. 

Q. Do you remember anyone you met on that particular trip?—A. No. sir. 

O. Your best recollection is that the letter written on October 24, addressed 
to William Tyler Page. Clerk of the House of Representatives, Washington, 
D. C.. that accompanied contestee's Exhibit 9b, was written on your road home 
from Jerseyville?—A. It might have been written in Jerseyville or on the road 
home or when I got home. 

Q. What time did you leave Jerseyville that day?—A. In the morning some 

q. Do you remember what train it was, on what road?—A. On the C., B. & Q. 
I drove from Jerseyville over to a station east of there. Eldred, I believe. I am 
not sure now. 

Q. Who drove you?—A. Some one from Jerseyville. 

O. You don’t remember the name? Was it an automobile or a horse and 
carriage delivery?—A. It was a horse and buggy. 

q When did you prepare contestee’s Exhibit 9b?—A. Right about that time; 
at the same time the letter was prepared. 

q They were both prepared at the same time?—A. About the same time. 

q \v a s contestee’s Exhibit 9b prepared by you. then, on the road from Jer¬ 
seyville?— A. I can't say as to that. I know I was working in Jerseyville and 
I didn't say whether it was in Jerseyville or on the road home. 

q Where were you working in Jerseyville on contestee's Exhibit No. 9b?— 
A. At the hotel. 

Q. Anyone with you there?—A. No, sir. 

q What do you say as to who typed contestee’s Exhibit 9b?—A. You mean 
the original? 


28 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Yes; who did the typing of the original? This is a carbon copy?—A. No; 
it isn’t a carbon copy; it is a copy. 

Q. What was it taken from?—A. Memoranda. 

Q. What memoranda?—A. Memoranda that I kept of expenses. 

Q. It wasn’t written from the—did you preserve a carbon copy of the origi¬ 
nal?—A. No, sir. 

Q. So contestee’s Exhibit 9b was another copy made up tyom memoranda; 
do I understand you correctly?—A. I kept a copy of the figures, but not an 
exact copy of the report. I kept the figures, and the figures and items included 
on Exhibit 9b was made up from those figures. It is substantially the same 
thing. 

Q. Those were the same figures, is that correct, that you made up the origi¬ 
nal from?—A. Substantially so. 

Q. You say substantially so. Is this an accurate copy of the original you 
sent?—A. I would say it is. 

Q. There might be a difference of a few cents, a small amount?—A. An 
error of some kind, but substantially the same thing. 

Q. But do you remember whether it was made up from the notes—what 
did you make up the original from, Mr. Shaw?—A. Notes and memoranda. 

Q. Contained in what—use your bank book?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Use your check book?—A. No; I don’t think I used the check book. 

Q. Well, these expenditures, were they made by check or paid by cash?—A. 
Some by cash and a good many of them by check. 

Q. But you didn’t refer to your check book in the matter of making up the 
original?—A. No; to memoranda kept. 

Q. l T ou kept a memoranda, then, of your expenditures at that time?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Got that memoranda with you?—A. No; I haven’t. 

Q. Do you know whether you could produce it or not?—A. I do not. 

Q. You had that memoranda as late as January 31, did you not?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And you made up this report from that memoranda?—A. Yes, sir—no; 
the original report was made up from the memoranda. 

Q. Then you didn’t make this report up from the memoranda which you 
made the original report from?—A. It was taken from the figures included in' 
the first report. 

Q. Where did you get the figures?—A. From memoranda. 

Q. Then I understand you correctly, when you made up the contestee’s Ex¬ 
hibit 9b from the same memoranda you made up the original which you say 
you mailed on the 24th day of October?—A. I don’t believe I understand the 
question. 

Mr. Dieterich (to reporter). Bead the question again. 

(Question read.) 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You did?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then you did preserve the memoranda that you made up the original 
from?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And had that as late as January 31?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is it now?—A. I can’t say. 

Q. Could you produce it?—A. I can’t produce it now; it may be in Wash¬ 
ington. 

Q. Will you make a search for it and see whether you can produce it at 
this session of the taking of this evidence?—A. Yes; I will. 

Q. You say you didn’t use your check book in guiding you in making this 
statement?—A. No, sir. 

Q. What do you say as to whether or not these expenditures, as shown in 
this memoranda, as shown in contestee’s Exhibit No. 9b. were made by check 
or cash?—A. I don’t think I got that, Judge. 

Q. What do you say as to whether the expenditures purporting to be made 
in contestee’s Exhibit No. 9b were made by check or cash?—A. Both cash and 
check. 

Q. To what amount or proportion? Did you do any considerable cash pav¬ 
ing?—A. Well, that would depend upon judgment; I would say I did quite a 
little. The most of it was by check. 

Q. What amount of the items of $1,101.85, as shown expended by contestee’s 
Exhibit No. 9b. were made in cash?—A. You say what proportion?’ 

Q. Yes.—A. I can’t say. 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


29 


1920, to 

9b under 
was that 


Q. Have you any judgment on it now?—A. No; I haven’t, without a de¬ 
tailed study of the items. I could work it out. I don’t know whether I have 
all the data here with me or not. But I would hardly know how to estimate it. 

I think I could tell by looking over the list and in a general way. 

Q. Have you your canceled checks?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Have you them with you?—A. I have. 

Q. Have you the canceled checks on the Springfield bank that you carried 
an account with?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you got them with you?—A. I think so. 

Q. Will you produce those checks and let us compare and see how many 
of these expenditures were made by check?—A. With the consent of my 
attorney I will. I think I have a number of them. I came away in a hurry 
and overlooked a few items, but I have substantially all of them. How do 
you want them? 

Q. Are they in chronological order?—A. I think they are. 

Q. Can you answer me whether or not the item on October 2, 
f-a-r-s—was that cash or check?—A. Fare? 

Q. Oh, fare?—A. Railroad fare. 

Q. Oh, yes; railroad fare. I note an item in contestee’s Exhibit 
date of October 9: Capitol Engraving Co., electrotype, $12.25. How 
paid?—A. What was the amount? 

Q. $12.25.—A. That was paid by check. 

Q. The same day, the Ashland Sentinel—what was that for? Was that a 
primary or election expense?—A. This Capitol engraving? 

Q. Yes.—A. I think it was for a plate. 

Q. Was that—when was that purchased, do you know?—A. I think about 
that time, perhaps on the 7th or 8th; it was a plate, I think, for a lithograph. 

Q. What I want to know was whether it was used in your primary campaign 
or in your campaign for election.—A. I think in the election. 

Q. I notice “Ashland Sentinel,” under same date, “ publicity, $20.80.” Was 
that by cash or check?—A. By check. 

Q. On what bank?—A. The Ridgely Farmers’ Bank. 

Q. You have that check, have you?—A. I have. 

Q. Dick Spicker Printing Co., $50. On the 10th. How was that made?—A. 
Isn’t, that $60? 

Q. l T es ; $60; it is blurred a little.—A. By check. 

Q. On what bank?—A. The Ridgely Farmers’ State Bank. 

Q. Did you draw any money out of the bank from October 10 to 13, for cam¬ 
paign purposes?—A. 10th to 13th—I did. 

Q. How much?—A. Well, I notice here $60. 

Yes; October 13, G. W. Morton, campaign wdl'ker, $75. 

On what bank?—A. Ridgely Farmers’ State Bank. 

Have you the check with you?—A. I have. 

Buckeye Sales Co., mimeograph letters, on October 13 
paid?—A. By check. 

Q. Davis Photo Service, for photo cards, $23.75; how was that paid?—A. 
Bv check. 

Q. On what bank?—A. Ridgely Farmers’ State Bank. 

Q. I notice several items on—did you draw any money or make any expendi¬ 
tures on October 15, in reference to your campaign?—A. I don’t see any checks 
here at present, but there are some for the 16tli. 

Q. For the 16th? What does it show on that date? What checks did you 
write?—A. One check for $50. 

Q. To whom?—A. Payable to cash. 

O. You mean that was for your own personal use?—A. Yes, sir. 

q. j notice an item here under date of October 16, to Bessie May Bellman, 
campaign worker; how was that made? A. What amount? 

q. $30 and $5.—A. That was cash, both items. / 

Q. Bv cash?—A. I think so; yes, sir. , ^ 

q j)[ ( \ you obtain that cash by drawing a check for yourself out of the 
bank?—A. Yes, sir; undoubtedly. 

O How much cash did you draw out of the bank for campaign purposes on 
the 16th of October?—A. Unless I am making an error, or overlooking some 
of these items, there was one for $50. which I think we have just mentioned, an 

item of $180 on October 16- ... 

Q. What was that for?—A. That is—what was it spent for? 

O. Yes.—A. For stamped envelopes. 


Q. 

Q. 

Q. 

Q. 


[Not legible.] 


how was that 



30 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Was that drawn out in cash?—A. That is my remembrance. 

Q. On October 16 I see “ Davis Photo Service, $71.95 ”; how was that paid, 
casli or check?—A. I think that was cash. 

Q. Who is the Davis Photo Service?—A. It is a concern in Chicago, doing 
business in Chicago. 

Q. You were not in Chicago on that day, were you?—A. No, sir. 

Q. What makes you think it was paid in cash, Mr. Shaw?—A. That is my 
remembrance of the transaction—that arrangements were made over the long¬ 
distance telephone for a quantity of photo cards. The agreement was that 
cash was to accompany the order to the amount of $23.75. or a certain percent¬ 
age. Then, at any rate, that was the amount paid. The photo cards came 
C. O. D. and were paid for, the balance due being $71.95. That is my remem¬ 
brance of the transaction. 

Q. Well, do your canceled checks show any expenditures on the 18th of Octo¬ 
ber?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. What do they show?—A. They show—shall I read them to you? 

Q. Yes.—A. On October 18, a check payable to the Ashland Sentinel to the 
amount of $3; October 18, Louis Hynes, $10. 

Q. Who was Louis Hynes?—A. He was a taxicab driver. 

Q. Where?—A. In Springfield. At that time he lived in Petersburg. 

Q. All right; go ahead.—A. On October 18. the Ashland Sentinel again, 
$28.80; October 18, Waverly Journal, $20; October 18, Petersburg Observer, 
$22; October 18, Republican Gazette, $3: October 18—this is blurred out—I 
think it is the 18th, Tallula Record, $3; October 18. Free Press, $3; October 18, 
the Republican, $3. 

Q. Where is that; do you know what place?—A. I think that is the paper 
edited in Havana. October 18, Versailles Sentinel, $3; October 18. Cliandler- 
ville Times, $3; October 18, a check made payable to Rev. M. ,T. Foley, $18.75. 

Q. Who is that?—A. I don’t know the gentleman personally, but from cor¬ 
respondence I have he is the editor of a paper edited in Quincy which has quite 
a circulation in this district. October 18, Greenview Review, $3; October 18, 
Manito Express, $3; October IS, Petersburg Observer, $3; October 18, Banner- 
Times, $3. 

Q. Now-A. Here is a check that never was dated. 

Q. What is it?—A. To the Mason City Banner-Times, and the amount is $7. 
I think it was on the 18th. October 18, Dr. T. J. Schweer—the amount is 
$72.80. Unless I have overlooked some, that is all for the 18tli. 

Q. What does it show for the 20th?—A. On the 20th of October. 1920, Baylis 
Guide, $3; on October 20, Greenview Artus, $3; October 20, Meredosia 
Budget, $3. 

Q. Any expenditures on tfle 21st?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What?—A. October 21, check to myself, $30 cash; on October 21, to Dick 
Spicker Printing Co., $100. 

Q. On the 23d?—A. On the 23d. William Scullion. $25. 

Q. What was that for?—A. Taxicab auto hire. 

Q. Anything further on the 23d? What are those checks on? All on the 
Springfield Bank that you have given?—A. I think they are. I am pretty sure 
they are. 

Q. The check you are looking at now, is it on the Springfield Bank?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Now. on the 23d, what other checks, if any?—A. G. W. Morton, $19.75, 
on October 23. 

Q. October 24?—A. Another check to G. W. Morton, amounting to $25. 

Q. What was that for?—A. That was a campaign expense. 

Q. Now, you say this—did you have those checks with you when you pre¬ 
pared this statement?—A. I don't know whether I had all of them or not; I 
doubt if I had. 

Q. What is your judgment on that? What is your recollection on that?— 
A. It is that I did not. 

Q. That you did not?—A. Yes. 

Q. Your recollection is that you kept an account of that unaided by any view 
of the checks given?—A. I think—I don't think all the checks were back from 
the bank at the time. 

Q. Got your bank book with you?—A. No, sir. 

Q. You don’t know when the checks—when your book was balanced up at 
the different times by the Ridgely Bank?—A. I do not. 

Q. Mr. Shaw, do you remember of any time that your bank book was bal¬ 
anced at the Ridgely Bank?—A. No; I wrote in to the bank a time or two, or 



RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


31 


communicated with it in some way, that I would like to have a statement 
showing the balance of my account. I remember one was sent, I think—my 
recollection is two or three different times. 

Q. Did you have a hank book? Did they issue you a pass book from the 
bank?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. You don’t know when those checks you have there were returned to you?— 
A. I do not. 

Q. What do you say as to whether they were returned in 1921 or 1920?— 
A. I can’t say. 

Q. Do you know whether your bank book, at the Ridgely Bank, was balanced 
in November?—A. No; I don’t remember. 

Q. To refresh your memory, Mr. Shaw, I will ask you if it isn’t a fact that 
on November 29 your bank book was balanced and your canceled checks re¬ 
turned?—A. I don’t know. 

Q. You don’t remember that?—A. No, sir. 

Q. If that was true, then you couldn’t have had the assistance of canceled 
checks in making this statement, could you? You didn’t have your canceled 
checks with you down to Jerseyville, did you?—A. I don’t think so. 

Q. And you were preparing this report there?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It is safe to say, now, what is your best judgment as to whether you were 
assisted by canceled checks in preparing this original report.—A. My best judg¬ 
ment was that I was partly assisted by canceled checks and partly by memo¬ 
randa. 

Q. Have you—but you haven’t any detin te recollection about that?—A. No. 
sir; I haven’t. 

Q. Pardon me for asking you again, but do you remember whether you had 
any canceled checks with you at the time you prepared this report?—A. I don't 
remember. 

Q. Y T ou don't remember?—A. No, sir. 

Q. When you say partly by canceled checks and partly from other memo¬ 
randa, you are just hazard.ng—you will pardon me—a guess?—A. No; I say 
I presume. 

Q. But you didn't state definitely as to that?—A. No, sir. 

Q. You wouldn't state definitely one way or the other?—A. No. 

Q. When did you first begin the preparation of the original of what you say 
contestee’s Exhibit No. 9b is a copy?—A. I kept a daily account. 

Q. Have you got it with you?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Where is it?—A. I don’t know. 

Q. Well, the question I asked you, Mr. Shaw, was when you began the 
preparation of the original of which Exhibit 9b is a copy. When did you begin 
the preparation of it?—A. I can’t say offhand. 

Q. Had you been working on it for some time?—A. I had it in mind, and I 
kept a memoranda as to what was going on. 

Q. I am trying to find out when you started to prepare the original report 
that you say you filed, or mailed, on the 24th day of October. When did you 
start the preparation of it?—A. Actually made out the report? 

Q. l T es.—A. I don’t know, hut prior to that date. 

Q. Prior to that date?—A. Oh, yes. 

Q. You remember definitely working on it in Jerseyville?—A. I think I do; 
yes, sir. 

Q. And do you remember whether you had blanks or not? Was the original 
made on a blank like this?—A. I don’t remember that, but I th nk it was. 

Q. Well where did you obtain those blanks?—A. I obtained them from some 
source in Washington, if I remember correctly. 

Q. Well, I am asking—the report, then, the original that you prepared and 
mailed on the 24th day of October, was prepared on a blank like this. Is that 
correct?—A. That is my remembrance; yes, sir. 

Q. When did you finish the drafting of t?—A. I don’t know. 

Q. Do you remember whether you finished it in Beardstown or .Tersey- 
ville?—A. I don’t remember that. 

Q. If you wrote the letter on the train from Jerseyville you had finished the 
report at that time, had you not?—A. The chances are that the figures were 
complete and about ready to mail in. 

Q. To mail in?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That would naturally be the last thing you would do, to write the letter 
saying the report was inclosed; yes?—A. Ordinarily; yes. 


32 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. You don’t mean to say you would write the letter when you just had the- 
data?—A. I mean to say this: I am not an expert stenographer and the 
tilling out of reports with a typewriter such as I carry, where there are lines 
and spaces to he filled in, are difficult. I can easily see where it might not 
have been done on the train. 

Q. I am only asking for your best recollection; whether it was completed at 
the time you typed the letter or whether the report still had to be typed after 
that.—A. My recollection— I would naturally assume it was prepared before 
tae letter was typed. 

Q. Did you make affidavit to it?—A. I think I did. 

Q. Before whom?—A. I do not recall. 

Q. Do you remember where you made the affidavit? [Answer not legible.] 

Q. You remember whether it was at Jersey ville?—A. No; I think it was 
either in Jacksonville or Beardstown. 

Q. Either Jacksonville or Beardstown. Were you in Jacksonville on the 
24th?—A. I don’t recall; I made a good many trips to Jacksonville. 

Q. Do you remember whether you were there on the 24th?—A. I do not recall. 
Q. What is your best judgment?—A. I can’t say. I was on the go most of 
the time at various places in the district. 

Q. What do you say now, Mr. Shaw, whether in Jersey ville on the 24th day 
of October you made affidavit to the original of what you say contestee’s Exhibit 
9b is a true copy, before any officer there?—A. No; I do not recall. 

Q. You don’t recall?—A. No. 

Q. Would you say you did or did not?—A. I don’t say. 

Q. You do definitely remember that you mailed it?—A. l"es, sir. 

Q. You remember depositing it in the post office?—A. Yes. 

Q. Where?— A. At Beardstown, Ill. 

Q. I mean in what part of the office. How did you deposit it there?—A. I 
j ‘resume in the- 

Q. Don't you have a recollection of it?—A. I don’t know of any other place 
; ould have been mailed. 

Q. I am asking, do you remember the act of depositing this mail?—A. Yes, sir. 
Q. Where did you deposit it?—A. In the post office. 

Q. What part? Where did you put it? What receptacle did you put it in?— 
A. I don't know. It was the place on the outside where it says “ letters.” 

. Q. Did you hand it to any of the employees in the post office or the post¬ 
master?—A. No. 

Q. Was it stamped?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You remember that?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it registered?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Why didn't you register it?—A. I don’t know why I didn't. 

Q. Did you register any of these reports you sent?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you read the reports before you sent them?—A. I presume I read 

it over. 

(j. You read the blank, did you?—A. I think I read one. 

Q. Did you comply with the blank, did you?—A. I intended to. 

Q. You intended to, and you knew this report was an important requirement 

of the Federal laws, didn’t you?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Understood and appreciated that, didn’t you?—A. I think I did. 

Q. You understood it was a requirement under an act usually known as the 
corrupt-practice act?—A. I don't know that I knew the act it was under, but I 
knew the reports were required to be in. 

Q. Do you remember what the last day for filing this report was?—A. I 
don’t know now. 

Q. Do you recall now what length of time previous to the election you had 
in which to file this report?—A. No; I don’t recall offhand. 

Q. But you were preparing it down at Jersey ville?—A. Yes. 

Q. And it was important enough that you took the data with you and 

worked on it when you were away from Beardstown on your campaign?_ 

A. Y T es. 

Q. You let it interfere with your regular campaign work to that extent?_ 

A. I didn’t say it interfered. 

Q. But you considered it important enough that you worked at it and that 
you carried it with you and were anxious to finish it?—A. Yes; I wanted to 
get it finished. 

Q. You had the blanks with you, did you not?—A. That is my remembrance. 

Q. They were sent to you by the committee, were they not?—A. I presume 
they were. My recollection is that they came from Washington. 



RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


33 


Q. Did you read the blank?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And complied with it?—A. I think I did. 

Q. Was this statement contained in the blank—you read the directions? 
A. I think I did. 

Q. Was this—I will ask you whether this direction was on the blank that you 
say you mailed in the post office: “To be tiled with the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives, Washington, D. C., not less than 10 nor more than 15 days be¬ 
fore the date of general election. The depositing of this statement in a legal 
post office, directed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, duly stamped 
and registered, within the time above named is a sufficient tiling of this state¬ 
ment." You knew that that statement was upon your blank?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You understood it had to be tiled with the Clerk of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives?—A. Yes. 

Q. And mailed it because the blank contained the directions on it, wasn't that 
true?—A. I presume I was trying to follow the directions. 

Q. Why didn’t you register it?—A. Because I didn’t think that, reads it is 
necessary to register it. 

Q. That is your explanation, that you didn’t think it reads it is necessary. 
If it had read that, you would have registered it, wouldn’t you?—A. I would 
have made some effort to register it. 

Q. Do you know whether you made an affidavit before any official in Beards 
town as to that?-—A. I don’t recall; no. I have affidav ts made out every once in 
a while, and I wouldn’t say whether I did or did not. 

Q. But you are not able at this time to recall the officer before whom you 
made the affidavit to the original of what you say contestee’s Exhibit 9b is a 
true copy?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you ready to say you made affidavit to it?—A. I think I am. 

Q. Where?—A. I don’t think I remember where. 

Q. Did you remember the act. of making an affidavit to that, or swear to 
that?—A. I think the last two reports were sworn to—the first two reports 
sent in. 

Q. You took this to the post office yourself, did you?—A. That is my remem¬ 
brance. 

Q. What time of day was it?—A. I don’t know. I usually go to the office 
early in the morning and late at night. 

Q. If this was done on the 24th day of October, when was the time—early in 
the morning or late at night?—A. I can’t say, but it might have been late at 
night—after the supper hour some time. I usually go to the office. 

Q. Is there a notary public in the building where your office was?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Where were you doing your work in Beardstown at that time?— A. My 
recollection is that I was doing it at my house. 

Q. Do you remember whether you had a stenographer in your employ at 
that time?—A. I think I did. 

Q. Who was it?—A. I think it was Esther Hanley. 

Q. Who is Esther Hanley?—A. A young lady living in Springfield. Miss 
Pearl Wagner also worked there, and Miss Pearl Nelson came in occasionally. 

Q. But you say your recollection is that you typed the original of that your¬ 
self?—A. I think I did. 

Q. That is your recollection of it?—A. Yes. 

Q. If you had a stenographer working at that time in the city of Beardstown 
and you didn’t type this at some place other than the city of Beardstown, you 
would have given it to the stenographer to type, would you not?—A. I have a 
typewriter and use it some and do considerable of my own work. 

Q. How many typewriters have you?—A. Two. 

Q. You say notwithstanding that you had a stenographer in your employ in 
Beardstown it might have been possible you would have typed it yourself on 
the 24rh?—A. l T es; I did a good deal of my work all the time. I do it now. 

Q. Since you have had a little time to think over it, I would like to have your 
best judgment as to whether that original was sworn to.—A. My best judgment 
is that it was sworn to. 

Q. Before what officer?—A. I can not say; I was around a good deal at that 
time and was in various places in the district. I was in Springfield considerable. 

Q. Mr. Shaw, if you were working on the report in Jerseyville on the 24th, it 
could not have been sworn to before the report was completed, could it?—A. No; 

I presume not. 

46991—21-3 


34 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. And you left Jerseyville and came direct to Beardstown, did you not?— 
A. I did on the trip referred to. 

Q. Yes; on the 24th.—A. I didn't testify that it was the 24th, hut it was 
about that date. 

Q. What do you say as to whether you were in Jerseyville on the 24th? A. 
I think the date I was in Jerseyville was one or two days prior to that, but I 
was working on it at that time. 

Q. But what do you say now about writing the letter on the train between 
Beardstown and Jerseyville?—A. I didn't say I wrote it on the train. I said 
it was probably prepared on the train or in Jerseyville or after I got home. 

Q. You said you typed it yourself?—A. I think probably I did. I can't swear 
whether I did or did not. 

Q. Calling your attention to contestee’s Exhibit 9c, is that a copy of an 
original?—A. I didn't say it is an exact copy, but like the former one it was 
made up from memoranda the same as the original was made up from. 

Q. Yes. And if asked about the different items and where you received the 
information and the data from which you prepared contestee’s Exhibit 9c. your 
answers would be the same as contestee’s Exhibit 9b?—A. I presume it would 
be substantially the same. 

Q. So we will not take the time to go over all that. Where is the original of 
that?—A. I presume it Is on tile with the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
in Washington. 

Q. When did you tile it there?—A. I refer you to the receipt 

Q. On January 31. 1921?—A. I think that was the date. 

Q. Well, do you—is that the first time you tiled a statement of your expendi¬ 
tures as shown by contestee’s Exhibit 9c with the Clerk of the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives?—A. I want to be sure that I understand you, Judge. 

Q. I mean the statement you tiled with the Clerk of the House of Representa¬ 
tives on January 31, 1921, is that the first statement covering your expenditures 
between those periods that you filed with the Clerk?—A. That was the first re¬ 
port filed in person with the Clerk. 

Q. In person. Did you tile one in any other way than in person? Did you mail 
a statement covering the expenditures as shown by contestee’s Exhibit 9c at 
Beardstown?—A. Do you mean the last one after the election report? (Looking 
at Exhibit 9c.) Yes, sir; if I understand your question correctly. 

Q. When did you mail that?—A. The early part of December. 

Q. Do you remember the date?—A. I do not recall it offhand; no, sir. I 
imagine about the 1st or 2d of December. I have the carbon copy of the letter. 

Q. Have you a copy of the letter accompanying the report?—A. I have. 

Q. Will you produce it, please?—A. Under date of December 2, 1920. |Hands 

paper to John Dieterich.] 

Q. Do you remember who typed that letter?—A. I think I did. 

Q. Where were you when you typed it?—A. I think at home. 

Q. Did you have any stenographer working for you at that time?—A. I don't 
think I did. 

Q. Did you prepare the original of what—the report I mean, that accom¬ 
panies—was there any report accompanying the letter of December 2, 1920?—A. 
l T es. sir. 

Q. Did you prepare that report?—A. I can't say. At that time I had at least 
two people coming in and doing extra work for me. But I presume I did. 

Q. What data did you prepare it from?—A. Memoranda kept during the cam¬ 
paign. 

Q. Don't know whether you had any canceled checks to assist you in that?— 
A. No; I do not recall. 

Q. Were the items of expenses that you list in contestee’s Exhibit 9c*. were 
they paid by check or cash?—A. In the preelection, it was paid both by check 
and cash. 

Q. Have you the canceled checks covering that period?—A. I think I have. 

Q. Will you produce them?—A. I will. What date is that? 

Q. The first date I notice is October 25. The last date is November 17.—A. 
Shall Ave run down the list like we did the other one? 

Q. Yes.—A. On October 25, the American Railroad Express, $136.56. 

Q. How was that paid?—A. By check. 

Q. What is the next?—A. October 25, Dick Spicker Printing do., $121. 

Q. What is the next?—A. October 25, W. E. Robinson, $290.50. 

Q. How is that made; check?—A. By check. 



RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


35 


Q. Go ahead.—A. October 26, W. B. Robinson, by check, $150. 

Q. How much?—A. $150. 

Q. I notice an item in this Exhibit 9c: Miss Bessie May Bellman.—A. That 
was cash. What is the item? 

Q. Campaign work, $25.—A. Schnepp & Barnes, $175.50; on October 22, check 
to myself, $50; on October 27, check to myself, $25; October 27, cash $10; 
October 28, Charlie Starks, check $13. 

Q. I note on October 28 L. E. Zerrien, campaign worker. How was that 
paid?—A. By check, October 28. November 2, 1920, check to Fred Nieman, 
$10; that was November 2. On November 9, James B. Livingstone, check 
$124.75; November 9, 1920, Cliandlerville Times, $3.05; November 9, 1920, Dick 
Spicker Printing Co.. $33.25; on November 9, 1920. Petersburg Observer, $5; 
November 9, Meredosia Budget, 60 cents. 

Q. You have it 80 cents in this report?—A. The check is 60 cents. An error 
in copying, probably November 9. 1920 [not legible]. The Republican, $5.60; 
November 9—1 will have to let somebody else pronounce it. 

Q. What is that institution?—A. As far as I know it is a newspaper. I am 
inclined to think it is a religious institution, published at Alton. It is 
Sehneiderhahn, or something like that. (Reporter: I don’t vouch for that 
word.) The first name is Loys, the middle initial P, and the amount of the 
check is $25. That was for newspaper publicity. On November 9, 1920, Ver¬ 
sailles Sentinel, $3; on November 9, 1920, Central Union Telephone Co., $30.71; 
on November 12, cash to myself, $175; on November 15, to A. C. Davis, $20; 
on November 17. Bessie May Bellman, $205; on November 17, cash $45. 

Q. I notice an item here to campaign worker. November 11, $200.—A. That 
was cash. 

Q. Those checks are all checks on the Ridgely Farmers State Bank; is that 
correct?—A. I think they are; I didn’t notice definitely and specifically. 

Q. Who was the campaign worker that you paid $200 to on November 11? 

Mr. Mumford. I want to object to the question, for the reason that, for 
political considerations, it doesn’t seem to me advisable that this witness should 
answer that question. If the committee insists on his disclosing the name of the 
person to whom he paid he will do so, but I feel he should not do that, for 
political and personal reasons. 

Mr. Dieterich. You say the statement you mailed on December 2. 1920, is an 
exact duplicate of this? 

The Witness. I will say substantially. 

Q. As far as amounts and times and persons contained in the expenditures 
are concerned, it is the same; is that correct?—A. Substantially the same. 

Q. What do you mean by using the word substantially?—A. That means ap¬ 
proximately, but, as further explanation, I should say I think it is the same. 
There is a chance, you will understand, in making reports at two different times 
from memoranda that there might be some variation, but not in any considerable 
amount. 

Q. Well, at the time you mailed the statement on December 2, when did you 
prepare that, do you remember?—A. No, sir; I do not. 

Q. Do you remember where you prepared it?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you remember whether you had the canceled checks at that time to 
guide you in the preparation of that report that you say you mailed on 
December 2?—A. No, sir; I cant’ say. 

Q. Mr. Shaw, I will ask you if you remember of having your book balanced 
and your canceled checks returned to you on December 29, 1920?—A. No ; I don’t 
remember the dates. I know the account was balanced and checks sent to me, 
I think, at various times, but I don’t remember when they were. 

Q. You haven’t your bank book with you to show when those times were?— 
A. No, sir; I am willing to produce it. 

Q. We would be much pleased if you would. Do you know whether you have 
it in the city of Beardstown?—A. I do not. 

Q. Will you make a search for it?—A. I will. 

Q. Do you remember when you deposited the—what is the letter purporting to 
be written on December 2, 1920, that you say is a carbon? Is that an office 
carbon?—A. It is a carbon copy of the original letter. 

Q. It is a carbon copy of the original letter?—A. 5Tes, sir. 

Q. And the original letter, you say, was mailed in the post office at Beards¬ 
town?—A. Yes. 

Q. By whom?—A. Myself. 


36 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Did you do the act of depositing it in the post office?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You remember that, do you?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You remember the occasion of it?—A. l T es, sir. 

Q. Did you register that letter?—A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. Do you remember where you deposited it in the post office; I mean what 
receptacle?—A. No; but I have the habit of depositing letters in the post office 
at the regular place. 

Q. You have a definite recollection of depositing this letter, have you not?— 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Well, do you know whether you deposited this letter in the regular 
receptacle in the usual place you deposit letters or handed it to some of the 
employees?—A. I think it was deposited in the regular receptacle. 

Q. What do you say as to whether it was registered?—A. I don’t think it was. 

Q. Accompanying that letter was a statement of your campaign receipts and 
expenditures from October 24 to December 2, 1920; is that correct?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is what the carbon copy purports to state, is it not, Mr. Shaw?—A. Yes, 
s.r; from October 24 to December 2. 

Q. That is correct?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that statement made on a blank form provided to you from any 
source?—A. That is my memory. 

Q. Have you any definite recollection about it?—A. I think it was. 

Q. You are not positive?—A. I am pretty sure it was on the regular blank. 

0. When you say pretty sure you haven’t any definite recollection as to 
whether that statement of expenses was made on a blank piece of paper or a 
proper blank, have you?—A. I am quite certain it was on a regular blank. 

Q. You mean you are positive it was?—A. Quite positive; it is easy to mis¬ 
take. 

Q. I want to get the condition of your mind, whether you have a definite recol¬ 
lection and are positive?—A. Y>s, sir; I am quite positive it was; it is very easy 
to be mistaken about it. 

Q. You might be mistaken about the blank which you say Exhibit 9b was on, 
might you not?—A. I don’t think so. 

Q. But you do not now have a definite recollection of what form that statement 
was in?—A. My recollection is that it was in the form such as you have in your 
hand. 

Q. That is your recollection?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But you won’t be sure?—A. I am quite positive; very sure. 

(>. Y T ou mean you are absolutely positive, or there is a doubt of your positive¬ 
ness?—A. There is no doubt as to my positiveness. 

Q. You are positive about mailing it?—A. Yes, sir; and about the form in 
which it was made out. 

Q. That is true of both of them, now?—A. That is true of both of them. 

Q. Was that sworn to?—A. I think it was. 

Q. Before whom?—A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Do you have any idea as to whom it was sworn before?—A. I think I 
might dig that information up from my memorandum. I will be willing to make 
a search for it. 

Q. You can’t now remember whether it was sworn to or who the officer was 
that administered the oath?—A. No; I don't know now. 

Q. But you think if given time you have a memorandum by which you could 
supply that informatin?—A. I have a memoranda in which I kept considerable 
information during the campaign, and I would be willing to search for that 
memoranda and see whether 1 have it, and if I have and can ascertain the in¬ 
format'on you want I will be glad to give it to you. 

Q. Would that memoranda lead you to know of any new information as to 
what notary public administered the oath?—A. It might. 

Q. What memoranda have you in mind, Mr. Shaw?—A. The memoranda I 
have been talking about all the time. 

Q. Is that in book form?—A. I think it was kept in a little tablet, or pad. 

Q. Why did you deposit that statement in the post office?—A. Because I am 
not in town very much during the daytime. I get up pretty early and get my 
mail early in the morning before the window is open, and am seldom in town or 
at the post office at any time in the day until after I come home and have dinner, 
and then usually come down and get my mail and deposit mail at that time. 

Q. I asked why you deposited that statement in the post office. Did you un¬ 
derstand it was necessary?—A. No; I don’t think it matters where it was de¬ 
posited. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


37 


Q. You don’t think it matters or makes any difference where it was de¬ 
posited?—A. No, sir. 

Q. That was your idea at that time? You understand the provisions of the 
act that requires the making of this statement, do you not?—A. I thought I did. 

Q. You had made two previous statements, had you not?—A. I believe so. 

Q. One at the primary and one you say you mailed on the 24th?—A. Yes, sir; 
I think those are the dates. 

Q. You understood who those statements were to he made to and tiled with, 
did you not?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. You made two statements before the primaries, didn’t you?—A. Two of 
them embodied in one statement. 

Q. Two embodied in one? You didn't make that on any blank, did you?—A. 
I don’t think I did. 

Q. Anyway, those two statements had been made concerning the expenditures 
in the primary election under the same statute requiring later statements to be 
made, (lid you not? You were endeavoring to comply with a Federal statute?—• 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And it was for that purpose you made out those statements and mailed 
them?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You understood who to direct them to, did you not?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. And that the statute required them to be filed with the Clerk?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that you could by depositing them hi the post office, stamped and 
registered, comply with that statute?—A. Yes. 

Q. What do you say as to whether you registered it or not?—A. I didn’t 
register it. 

Q. Notwithstanding you knew it was one of the requirements?—A. I don't 
think I understood it was one of the requirements of the statute. It said that 
may be considered sufficient evidence of tiling. 

Q. You had read the statute?—A. That part of it. 

Q. And had read the instructions contained on the blanks that were issued by 
the proper authorities?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And were endeavoring to comply with that?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is correct; and those instructions contain this language; that is, on 
the blanks you filled out: “ The depositing of this statement in a legal post office, 
directed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, duly stamped and regis¬ 
tered, within the time above required, is a sufficient filing of the statements.” 
You were attempting to comply with that provision, were you not?—A. Yes; I 
was attempting to meet with the requirements. 

Mr. Dieterich. Let us recess now until 1 o’clock. 

Recess taken for lunch. 

Hearing resumed at 1 p. m. Present; Same as before. 

GUY L. SHAW, the contestee herein, resumed the stand for further cross- 
examination by Mr. Dieterich, and testified as follows: 

Q. Mr. Shaw, since the noon hour have you refreshed yourself as to what offi¬ 
cer, if any, you made affidavit to the statements you say you mailed to the Clerk 
of the House of Representatives?—A. No, sir. 

Q. And you are not able now to state who the officer was?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Calling your attention to contestee’s Exhibit 9a, purporting to be a state¬ 
ment of primary expenses prior to September 5. 1920, was that sworn to before 
anyone?—A. No, sir; that was not, I think. 

Q. That was not?—A. I think it was not. 

Q. That was mailed to Washington?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What day?—A. I do not recall. The records show. 

Q. The carbon of your letter here shows—letter written September 22, saying 
you inclosed that statement.—A. That would be the correct date. 

Q. You deposited that in the post office?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The Beardstown office?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you do that personally or have an employee do it?—A. Personally. 

Q. You remember that, do you, of your own knowledge?—A. Yes, s r. 

Q. And you know where you deposited that in the post office? Whether it 
was in the receptacle for mail, or did you hand it to one of the employees?—A. 
I think I placed it in the receptacle where the letters are usually deposited in 
the post office. 

Q. Was that registered?—A. No, sir; I don't think it was. 

Q. Did you make more than one statement with reference to your primary 
expenditures?—A. Two statements were included in the one. 


38 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


Q. But they were all mailed at one time?—A. The both were mailed on one 
sheet of paper, at one time. 

Q. And one was a statement of primary expenses before September o, 1920? 
Why did you tlx that date?—A. I don’t know why I fixed the date; I suppose 
for the same reason I fixed all the dates. 

Q. And the others prior to September 30, 1920, and after September 5, why 
did you fix those dates?—A. I presume those were the dates 

Q* Do you know a gentleman by the name of Hollingsworth, at Washington, 
connected with the Clerk’s office of the House of Representatives, there? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know any of the deputies—are you acquainted with the Clerk of 
the House of Representatives?—A. I have met him in his office. 

Q. Did you ever meet a gentleman there by the name of Hollingsworth?—A. I 
am not sure; I have heard the name and think it was included in the notice of 
taking of depositions in Washington which was served on me, but am not sure 
whether I met the gentleman or not. 

Q. Did you ever talk to Hollingsworth about this matter?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever discuss the matter or mail the statements of your campaign 
expenditures with the Clerk of.the House of Representatives or any deputy in 
his office?—A. I never discussed any phase of the question with any deputy in 
his office and there never was any discussion on that subject, or, I think, any 
other subject, between me and the Clerk of the House of Representatives except 
at a time when I went there to see if my reports—whether they had been 
received. 

Q. Where were you when you made up the statement of which contestee’s 
Exhibit 9b and 9c are copies?—A. I think I was in Washington. 

Q. And which you filed as shown by this letter on January 31, 1921. You say 
you think you were in Washington?—A. I think I was. 

Q. Was Mr. Mumford, your attorney, with you at that time?—A. He was. 

Q. Where were you when you made up those statements?—A. At Congress 
Hall Hotel, I think. 

Q. That was just prior to January 31, this year?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say you think. Can you be any more positive than that?—A. Yes; 

I am sure. I didn’t do any work any place else other than the hotel. 

Q. Anyone with you?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you prior to that time talked to anyone in the office of the Clerk 
of the House of Representatives concerning your preparation and filing of 
reports—A. I don’t have any recollection of any such conversation. 

Q. What data did you make that from there?—A. The same data that I 
testified to several times this morning. 

Q. Did you have the canceled checks there?—A. I am not sure whether I 
did or not. Some of my information I had at home and some in Washington, 
and the reports would have been dated much earlier had I not been compelled 
to await a portion of it to be sent to me. 

Q. Under whose advice, if anybody’s, did you prepare the reports that you 
filed on January 31 with the Clerk of the House of Representatives?—A. I 
don’t remember acting under any one’s advice. 

Q. You did that of your own idea?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You say that all the items of expenditures contained in contestee’s Ex¬ 
hibits 9b and 9c were expended for campaign purposes, for the legitimate 
expenses of campaign purposes?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When was the election?—A. I think the election was held on No¬ 
vember 2. 

Q. November 2?—A. Y^es, sir. 

Q. Did you furnish anyone any money for the purpose of betting on the 
election?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Fishback, of Carrollton?—A. I 
have met, I think on two occasions, a man residing at Carrollton by the name 
of Fishback. 

Q. Did you ever furnish him with any money?—A. Not one cent, and never 
solicited his support or influence, if he has any, or in any way made any 
political campaign plans with him. 

Mr. Dietekich. I believe that is all. 

Redirect examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. You say, Mr. Shaw, you sent the last of these reports on December 2, 
1920, the preelection report, one month after the election?—A. What was the 
date? 



RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


39 


C. The 2d of December, 192(1.—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, you did not go to Washington until about what time? In Jan¬ 
uary?—A. I don’t think I recall, but I think the latter part of the month, per¬ 
haps the middle. 

Q. About how long had you been in Washington before you deposited with 
the Clerk of the House, in person, these reports which were left there on the 
31sf of January?—A. I can't say, but it was the length of time required to 
write home for data concerning campaign expenses and have it sent to me 
and received in Washington. 

(>. You had received a notice of contest from Mr. Rainey* had you not, dated 
December Id, 1920?—A. Yes, sir. 

(>. And in that notice you were informed for the first time that your reports 
were not on iile in the (Jerk's office?—A. That was the first notice I had. 

(„>. Then, very soon after that time did you go on to hunt and plan and file 
these reports you speak of?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Shaw, are you a lawyer?—A. I am not. 

(>. What is your occupation?—A. 1 have been engaged in farming all my 
life, until just recently getting away from it a little. 

Q. Are you and have you been holding any other office of honor from your 
neighbors?—A. I am a member of the constitutional convention. 

(>. The Illinois Constitutional Convention?'—A. Yes. sir. 

(J. And were you engaged in the duties of that place during a considerable 
part of the year 1920?—A. Yes, sir; I was there a considerable part of the 
year. 

(}. Where did that convention meet?—A. In Springfield, Ill. 

(>. So you were at Springfield a considerable portion of the time, were 
you, during that year?—A. I was. 

(). Is the constitutional convention now finally adjourned or is it in recess 
now?—A. In recess. 

(}. Was it in recess at the time of the election in the fall of 1920 and a few 
weeks before that?—A. It was. 

Q. It was convenient for you, was it, Mr. Shaw, to have your bank trans¬ 
actions, (>]• some of them, carried on in Springfield?—A. It was. 

(}. Did you deposit both of these contributions from the national committee 
in that bank in Springfield?—A. Yes, sir. 

(>. At about the time they were received?—A. .lust a few days after they 
were received, each time. 

Q. Have you in your possession here to-day receipts showing the dates of 
those deposits and the amounts of those deposits?—A. I have. 

Q. Here?—A. I think I have. 

Q. Will you produce them? [To reporter.] Mark these papers “ Contestee's 
Exhibits Nos. 12a and 12b.” 

Papers marked “ Contestee's Exhibits Nos. 12a and 12b" for identification. 

Mi 1 . Mum ford. Mr. Shaw, do contestee's Exhibits Nos. 12a and 12b. which I 
have in my hand, show the deposit of moneys in Springfield, of $1,000 on Octo¬ 
ber 13 and $1,000 on October 26. 1920, and are these the contributions received 
from the committee? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you desire them to go in the record?—A. Yes, sir. 

Which said papers, marked “Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 12a and 12b" are at¬ 
tached to this transcript of proceedings. 

Mr. Mumford. Did you, after the election, deposit any money in the Ridgely 
Bank, at Springfield, other than those two $1,000 deposits? 

A. Yes. sir. 

q. What was the amount of that deposit?—A. I .don't recall offhand, but I 
think $1,100 or $1,200. 

Q. Did that money or that deposit have anything to do with any political 
connection whatever?—A. Yes; I spent most, of it in campaign work. 

q Was it in tlie form of contributions or your own money?—A. My own 

money. . 

Q. That was in addition to these two thousand-dollar deposits?—A. \ os, s r. 

Q. And after the election?—A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Recross-examination by Mr. Dieterich : 

q. i believe you stated you were familiar with the law requiring all these 
statements when you filed your primary statement; is that correct?—A. Yes, 
sir; I think so. 


40 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. You were familiar with it when you filed the other statements. You say 
you filed your notice of answer in this matter?—A. I do not recall the date, 
but the date of taking of testimony in Washington. 

Q. When was the notice of contest filed or served on you?—A. I don’t remem¬ 
ber that; the data here will show. 

Q. To refresh your memory, wasn’t it the 20th of December?—A. I think that 
was about the time. 

Q. Did you file any answer to that notice?—A. l"es, sir. 

Q. When?—A. I refer to the notice just mentioned; I do not recall the date. 

Q. The one you .say was dated Washington, February 23, 1921, contestee’s 
Exhibit No. 10?—A. This is the notice I have reference to. 

Q. This is the only answer you have filed; is that correct?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You never filed any answer other than this and deposited it in the 
post office?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Well, had you read the Federal statutes with reference to contests of 
election?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Did you know it was necessary to file an answer to the contest?—A. I 
was confused on that point, and thought the answer, the other information that 
I had filed, was sufficient answer. 

Q. Who advised you on that?—A. I don't think I advised with any lawyer; 

I was away from my own attorney at that time. 

Q. You mean to say you consulted the statutes yourself?—A. I didn’t consult 
the statutes, hut certain portions of the statutes. 

Q. You consulted the statutes in reference to contests of election, did you?— 
A. Partially so. 

Q. And you never filed the answer to it. before February 23, and that was 
the day they were taking depositions; is that correct?—A. Yes, s'r; I think so. 

Q. Up to that time you had neither affirmed nor denied the allegations in 
the notice of contest?—A. I stated that in taking the matter up after getting 
to Washington I was under the impression that the filing of the reports, such 
as I did file, was sufficient answer. 

Q. Will you give me an answer to this question; Up to February 23. 1921, so 
far as any answer being filed by you or any denial being filed by you, there had 
been none?—A. That is correct. 

Q. You say the $1,100 deposited in the bank at Springfield was not received 
from campaign contributions?—A. It was not. 

Q. Do you mind stating where that was received from—what source?—A. It 
was received from the source of personal income, which I think is not necessary 
to state. If my attorney says it is necessary to state it, or if the committee 
should want it, I should do so freely. 

Q. It doesn’t matter. Did you receive any contributions from the Republican 
central committee of Cass County?—A. I did not. 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

Reredirect examination by Mr. Mumford : 

Q. Just one question. Mr. Shaw, do I clearly understand you as saying that 
you were under the impression that the reports of receipts and expenditures 
which you handed to the Clerk of the House on the 31st of January, 1921, was a 
sufficient answer to the notice of contest until I advised you to the contrary?—A. 
Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Rerecross-examination by Mr. Dif.tericii; 

Q. And the notice of contest was served on you on the 20th of December; is 
that correct?—A. I think that is about the date. 

Q. And you knew the law required that an answer lie filed within 30 days, 
did you not?—A. I knew something about it. 

Q. Notwithstanding, neither one of these—neither what you filed with the 
Clerk of the House of Representatives nor the answer denying here, was tiled 
w.thin 30 days?—A. The records will show. 

Mr. Mumford. That is probably correct. 

Mr. Dieterich. The statements were not filed until the 31st day of January 
and the other until the 23d day of February; is that correct? 

The Witness. I think that is about true. 

Q. And your answer to Mr. Mumford was that you thought the statements 

filed on the 31st day of January were in compliance with the law*?_\ Yes sir 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


11 


AFFIDAVIT. 

State of Illinois, County of Sangamon, ss: 

I, Guy L. Shaw, the contestee in these proceedings, having first been duly 
sworn, do hereby certify that I have carefully read tlie foregoing deposition 
and do affirm and acknowledge it as a true statement of the facts and cir¬ 
cumstances as set forth therein. 

Guy L. Shaw. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public in and for the county of 
('ass. State of Illinois, this 7th day of April, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, 

Notary 1 Public. 

My commission expires January 27, 1923. 

ROY L. PHELPS, called as a witness in behalf of the contestee, having been 
first duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford, and testified as 
follows: 

Q. You may state your name to the notary.—A. Roy L. Phelps. 

Q. Where do you live?—A. I live right near Beardstown, on the Chamller- 
ville Road. 

Q. Did you have any connection with the Republican county central com¬ 
mittee of Cass County during the campaign in the fall of 1920?—A. 1 did. 

Q. What was your connection?—A. I was precinct committeeman. 

Q. Were you familiar with the actions of the committee in the course of the 
campaign?—A. To quite an extent. 

Q. Did that local county committee contribute any money to contestee, Mr. 
Shaw, for campaign purposes?—A. You mean through me? 

Q. Did it, so far as you know?—A. None, to my knowledge. 

Q. Did you, or did you not—would you, or would you not, know if the 
county committee had made any contribution to him?—A. I think I would. 

Q. Did Mr. Slmw receive any contribution toward his campaign expenses 
from the State Republican central committee of Illinois through your county 
commiteee?—A. Not that I know of, but I am not in shape to say for certain. 
Not to my knowledge. I never heard of any. 

Q. Did you attend the meetings of your committee during the campaign?—A. 
I did. 

Q. Active in the conduct of the campaign?—A. Quite a Hit. 

Q. Did you do any work for Mr. Shaw during the campaign?—A. I did, so 
far as the ticket was concerned. I d dn't get out any more for Mr. Shaw than 
for the regular ticket, except I assisted him on one occasion. 

Q. Was that a voluntary act upon your part, or were you paid?—A. No, sir; 
no pay. 

Q. Do you know whether considerable other work and assistance was rendered 
without compensation?—A. Y>s: there were several of us at one time that 
assisted him. It was just in the way of preparing literature. 

Q. Did Mr. Shaw conduct an active canvas and campaign for election?—A. 
Yes ; I think so. 

Q. Did he go out over the district circulating literature of this kind?—A. 
He did, so far as any of my supervision was concerned, in territory where I 
would have knowledge of it; yes. 

Q. He conducted an active campaign for election?—A. Y^es, sir. 

Q. The amount of money he spent you have no means of knowing, I assume?— 
A. No; I haven’t. 

Mr. Mumford. I think that is all. 

Mr. Dieterich. No cross-examination. 

AFFIDAVIT. 

State of Illinois, County of Sangamon, ss: 

I. Roy L. Phelps, having first been duly sworn, do hereby certify that I have 
carefully read the foregoing deposition, and do affirm and acknowledge it as a 
true statement of the facts and circumstances as set forth therein. 

Roy" L. Phelps. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public in and for the county of 
Cass, State of Illinois, this 11th day of April, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] 


D. M. Maney, 
Notary Public. 


42 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


G. W. MORTON called as a witness in behalf of the contestee, having first 
been duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford and testified as follows: 

Q. State your name.—A. G. W. Morton. 

Q. Where do you live?—A. 212 East Sixth Street, Beardstown, Cass County, 
Illinois. 

Q. You are acquainted with the contestee, Guy L. Shaw?—A. I am. 

Q. Are you or are you not a political and personal friend of his?—A. I am. 

Q. Were you intimately acquainted with him during his campaign for elec¬ 
tion?—A. I was. 

Q. Were you acquainted with what he was doing and the manner in which 
he was conducting the campaign?—A. Yes. 

Q. Did or did not Mr. Shaw make an active campaign out over the district 
himself?—A. He did. 

Q. Were you with him at that time?—A. I was about 10 days with him. 

Q. In what count es were you with him, Mr. Morton?—A. Morgan, Scott, 
Greene, Jersey, Calhoun, and Pike. 

Q. IX d Mr. Shaw spend any money on that occasion?—A. He did; he paid the 
expenses of—his expenses and my expenses and the taxi-driver's expenses. 

(.}. I presume you have no means of knowing how much he spent?—A. No, sir. 

Q. But he spent considerable money, did he?—A. He did. 

Q. Did you know of his having more or less paid publicity work in one way 
or another during the campaign, with newspapers and lithographs and literature 
of any sort outs tie of newspaper work?—A. Yes; lie used a lot of literature and 
lithographs; mailed out a large number of folders and letters. I don’t know 
how many. 

Q. Did you work for him and his interests at any time during the campaign 
other than at the times you were with him?—A. I did. 

Q. Where did you go for him?—A. I was in Morgan County, Pike, Scott; I 
made a trip to Springfield for him. 

Q. Were you not in Calhoun County, or were you?—A. Only when he was 
with me. These last counties I covered alone. 

Q. Mr. Morton, did he pay you at various times amounts of money for your 
work and expenses?—A. He did, for my expenses. 

Q. Did you have any knowledge of an occasion when Mr. Shaw’s wife bought 
$180 worth of stamped envelopes? I believe I have the amount right.—A. In this 
way: We supposed they wouldn’t have them here, and therefore we thought we 
would buy them in other towns. I went to Springfield ; they happened to be 
out; and then back to Jacksonville and learned they could get them there and 
telephoned to Mrs. Shaw. I believe Mrs. Morton went over with her when she got 
the envelopes. 

Q. Did you afterwards know of bringing them into the office here?—A. Yes, 
sir; and the mailing of them. I mailed several boxes myself, put them on the 
train in bunches and sent them by express to other counties, to be mailed from 
the county seats. 

Q. Did you know of other persons besides yourself who worked for Mr. 
Shaw and in his interests?—A. I do. 

Q. Do they relate to election day or before election day?—A. Before elec¬ 
tion day, we were making a speaking tour of Scott and Pike Counties. E. A. 
Zerrien, of Princeton, was with me, and W. H. H. Miller, of Champaign. 

Q. Did Mr. Shaw pay the expenses of these trips?—A. Through me. 

Q. Furnished you money for that purpose?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was all the money paid to you paid for legitimate purposes and expended 
for legitimate purposes?—A. Yes, sir; for taxi hire, car fare, hotel bills, two 
or three items to newspapers, printing, telephone, and telegraph. 

Q. Were you frequently at Mr. Shaw’s office and his house while this cam¬ 
paign was carried on?—A. I was. 

Q. More or less familiar with the conditions of the campaign?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any attention called to any report or printing on blank 
forms of receipts and expenditures being filled out at Mr. Shaw’s house?—A. I 
did. 

Q. Did you see them there?—A. I did. 

Q. Have you any means, Mr. Morton, of recalling just when you saw them?— 
A. It was somewhere, on Sunday, between the 33th of October and election day. 

Q. You have no means of recalling just when it was?—A. It was on Sunday; 
I think the Sunday after the 13th of October. 

Q. But you saw a document of that kind there and knew it was being pre¬ 
pared.—A. Yes; we talked about it. 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


43 


Q. You know nothing personally about the mailing of it?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you have any personal observation of another report of a like charac¬ 
ter made on a printed form in December, or did you see that at all or know 
anything about that?—A. In December; no. 

Q. About a month after the election.—A. Not that I recall. 

Q. .You didn’t particularly examine this report which you saw?—A. No ; it was 
just lying off to the left, and he made the remark he was making out his report, 
and I believe I mentioned the money I had received. 

Q. Do you know Dr. Scliweer?—A. I do. 

Q- Postmaster at Beardstown?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q- Did you at any time have any conversation with Dr. Scliweer, postmaster 
at Beardstown, in which he made any statement in regard to Mr. Shaw obtaining 
a seat in Congress or on that subject?—A. One day we were talking politics, 
sometime in October, on the corner of State and Second Streets, and he said Mr. 
Shaw would never get to Congress. I believe that was the word—never get to 
Congress. 

Q. When was that, before or after the election?—A. Before the election. 

Q. How long before?—A. A week or so; 1 don’t remember exactly. I just 
remember the conversation. 

Q. Did he give any further explanation of why he made that prediction?— 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Is there any other matter connected with these questions involved here 
that I haven't asked you about that you wish to state to the committee?—A. 
Not that I can think of. 

Mr. Mumfokd. That is all. 

Cross-examination by Mr. Dieterich : 

Q. So Dr. Scliweer said he didn't think Mr. Shaw would get to Congress?— 
A. l"es, sir, 

Q. Nothing unusual about that remark, was there?—A. Well, 1 don’t know. 
He made the remark. 

Q. It was before the election?—A. I think so. 

Q. Do you remember what time in October?—A. No; I don’t. I just re¬ 
member the conversation. 

Q. The fore part or latter part of October?—A. I think ? t would he in the 
latter part, because in the fore part I wasn’t active in the campaign. 

Q. When did you become active?—A. The 13th of October. 

Q. Did you make any tour with Mr. Shaw?—A. I did, starting on the 13tli of 
October. 

Q. Did you get back—when did you get back?—A. We started on Monday 
morning and got back Saturday night. Then we started off again the next 
Monday morning, I believe, and were together a few days. I think we were 
together about 9 or 10 days. 

Q. Now, let me get that. On the 13tli of October you started out, on Monday. 
You started out campaigning with Mr. Shaw. And made a tour of the counties 
you have mentioned.—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What counties did you go to that week?—A. Morgan, Scott, Green, Jer¬ 
sey, Calhoun. Pike—we didn't cover all of Pike, but worked through Pike and 
then back through Morgan and on. 

Q. And then you came back on Saturday?—A. Saturday night. 

Q. When did you leave with him again ?—A. Monday morning. 

Q. The next Monday?—A. l T es. 

Q. A week from the Monday that you went before?—A. Yes. 

Q. And how long were you gone with him that time? Where did you go?— 
A. Went together over in Morgan County, then I went over to Pike myself. 

Q. Monday or Tuesday?—A. I can't tell. I believe it was Tuesday morning. 

Q. Where did Mr. Shaw go?—A. He joined the special train that the Republi¬ 
cans had out and went down through Jacksonville. 

Q. Tuesday or Monday?—A. My recollection is that it was Monday. 

Q. Which way was that train going?—A. It came in over the Burlington, 
switched to the C. & A., and south on the C. A A. They said they were going 
to Roodhouse, Carrollton—I don’t know just where. 

Q. South part of the district?—A. l T es. 

Q. And you say you saw one of these exhibits, a statement of some kind— 
when did you see that?—A. One Sunday. 

Q. What Sunday was it?—A. Somewhere between the 13th and election. 


44 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. You don’t know whether it was the Sunday after you got back?—A. I 
believe it was that Sunday, but am not positive. 

Q. Statement was made out, was it?—A. I didn’t examine it. I simply turned 
in my expense account. 

Q. You have been interested in Mr. Shaw's campaign, haven’t you?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. By the way, you are the party that first asked him to become a candidate 
for Congress?—A. Well, I don’t know. 

Q. You are one of them?—A. I asked him to become a candidate. 

Q. Before lie became a candidate?—A. Possibly. 

Q. Have been interested in his campaign since? There isn’t anything criminal 
about that?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. About how much money did he pay you during the campaign?—A. $119.75. 

Q. Pay you any after the campaign was over with?—A. No, sir. 

Q. None at all?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever give you any check after the campaign was over with—after elec- 
tion?—A. No, sir. 

Q. How did he make these payments to you?—A. He gave me a check on the— 
the first payment was $75. May I refresh my memory with the dates? 

Q. Yes.—A. On October 13 he gave me a check for $75. On October 23, 
another check for $19.75- 

Q. Where did he give you that check?—A. Here in Beardstown. 

Q. On the 23d?—A. Yes. 

Q. Didn't he give you that check when you started leaving for Pike County?— 
A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Did he—did you say he did or didn’t?—A. I don't remember. 

Q. Pie did give you a check when you left Jacksonville for Pike County, 
didn’t he?—A. The first check was for $75, when we were together. Then he 
paid all the expenses, and I carried that $75 with me. Then, when I got by 
myself, I used that and spent $19.75, which lie refunded. 

Q. You used $19.75 out of the $75?—A. Of my money, over and above the $75. 

Q. And that is what the money represents?—A. Yes. sir. 

Q. He was here in Beardstown when he gave you that check?—A. I am not 
positive. If I remember rightly, one of these two checks was given in Beards¬ 
town. one on the 24th for $25. 

Q. Where was he when he gave you that check?—A. In Beardstown. 

Q. Go ahead. Do you remember what bank that check was on?—A. No, sir. 

Q. After that, when did he give you money?—A. That is the $119.75. 

Q. That is all he ever gave you?—A. That is all he gave me for campaign 
purposes. I have done things for him, sold insurance, etc., he has paid me for 
five or six years, but that is all the campaign expenses. 

Q. Did he ever promise you anything during the campaign?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Never said anything to you about making you postmaster, did he?—A. No, 
sir. 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

AFFIDAVIT. 

State of Illinois, County of Cass, ss: 

I, G. W. Morton, having first been duly sworn, do hereby certify that I have 
carefully read the foregoing deposition, and do affirm and acknowledge it as 
a true statement of the facts and circumstances as set forth herein. 

G. W. Morton. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public in and for the county of 
Cass, State of Illinois, this lltli day of April, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 27, 1923. 

E. T. HUNTER, called as a witness on behalf of the contestee, having first 
been duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford, and testified as fol¬ 
lows : 

Q. What is your name?—A. E. T. Hunter. 

Q. Where do you live, Mr. Hunter?—A. Beardstown, Ill. 

Q. What is your vocation or employment?—A. Cashier, Beardstown State 
Bank. 




RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


45 


Q. Acting in that capacity during the presidential and congressional elections 
in the fall of 1920?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What, if any, connection did you have with the Cass County Central 
Committee during that campaign?—A. Secretary of the committee. 

Q. As secretary, you kept the records of the doings and plans of the commit¬ 
tee, did you, Mr. Hunter?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And attended its meetings?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did the Cass County Republican County Central Committee contribute 
any money to Guy Shaw’s campaign expenses?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Shaw receive any assistance or aid in his campaign expenses 
from the Republican State Central Committee, so far as you know, as secre¬ 
tary of the county central committee?—A. No; not that I know of. 

Q. As a matter of fact, Mr. Hunter, were you acquainted with the activities 
of Mr. Shaw, whether he made an active campaign for this election?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Had persons working for him in his interest?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did you know of some work done gratuitously and without any ex¬ 
pectation of reward at all?—A. I don't know anything about that proposition 
at all. I just knew he had some help; some people working for him, and I 
don’t know anything further about it. 

Q. Have any personal knowledge of the literature sent out—any of it?—A. 
No; except that I received through the mail the statements of whatever were 
sent out. 

Q. Did you know of his lithograph being posted or circulated in the dis¬ 
trict?—A. Only as I seen them. 

Q. You did see them posted?—A. Yes. 

Q. Was he away from Beardstown a considerable portion of the campaign?— 
A. I think he was. 

Q. I understand that the district comprises 10 counties, Mr. Hunter, and 
there are no large cities in the district at all.—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. An agricultural district?—A. l T es, sir. 

Q. Is there any other matter in connection with this contest that you think 
of which would be of assistance to the committee in determining these issues 
that I haven’t asked you about?—A. I don’t think so; I know very little about 
it myself. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all, Mr. Hunter. 

AFFIDAVIT. 


State of Illinois, County of Cass, ss.: 

I, E. T. Hunter, having been first duly sworn, do hereby certify that I have 
carefully read the foregoing deposition, and do affirm and acknowledge it as a 
true statement of the facts and circumstances as set forth therein. 

E. T. Hunter. 


Sworn and subscribed before me, 
Cass, State of Illinois, this lltli day 
[seal.] 


a notary public in and for the county of 
of April, A. L>. 1921. 

D. M. Maney, 
Notary Public. 


My commission expires January 27, 1923. 


J. E. HAYWOOD, called as a witness on behalf of the eontestee, having first 
been duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford and testified as fol¬ 
lows : 

Q. State your name.—A. J. E. Haywood. 

Q. Where do you live?—A. Beardstown. 

Q. Have any connection with the Republican County Central Committee of 
Cass County during the elections here in 1920?—A. I was a member of the 

committee. „ 4 ^ „ 

Q. Active in political work during the campaign?—A. Not outside of my own 

precinct. 

O. Attended committee meetings?—A. les, sir. 

Q. Who was treasurer of your committee. Mr. Haywood, if you remember?— 
A. I think it was J. Savage. 


46 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Q. Did the county central committee, so far as your knowledge and informa¬ 
tion go, furnish any money to Mr. Shaw for his expenses?—A. Not to my recol¬ 
lection or knowledge. 

Q. Did the Republican State Central Committee furnish any money, so far 
as your knowledge goes?—A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know Mr. Shaw made an active campaign for election?—A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Out in the district, more of less?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. People working for him, various people, in his interest?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what proportion of that work was paid for and what was 
voluntary?—A. No, sir; I do not. I can’t tell you. I know that I helped to do 
some voluntary work myself, that is all. 

Q. You know of work contributed in addition, to what he paid for?—A. Yes. 
sir. 

Q. You have no means of knowing how much money he spent himself?—A. 
I haven’t any idea. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

Mr. Dieterich. No cross-examination. 

AFFIDAVIT. 

State of Illinois, • 

County of Cass, ss: 

I, J. E. Haywood, having first been duly sworn, do hereby certify that I have 
carefully read the foregoing deposition, and do affirm and acknowledge it as a 
true statement of the facts and circumstances as set forth therein. 

.T. E. Haywood. 

Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public in and for the county of 
Cass, State of Illinois, this lltli day of April, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 27, 1923. 

DICK SPICKER, called as a witness on behalf of the contestee, having first 
been duly sworn, was examined in chief by Mr. Mumford and testified as 
follows: 

Q. Your name.—A. Dick Spicker. 

Q. Where do you live?—A. In Beardstown. 

Q. What is your occupation?—A. Printing. 

Q. What is the name of the firm with which you are connected?—A. The 
Dick Spicker Printing Co. 

Q. Is it a job-printing company?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You know Mr. Shaw, do you?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did your company do considerable work for him, campaign work, during 
the campaign?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you receive considerable payments from him for that work?—A. I 
received all that was due. 

Q. Any means of remembering the exact amounts you received. Mr. Spicker?— 
A. I have a statement of it. [Hands paper to Mr. Mumford.] 

Q. You received a total of $394.05?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And the payments were made at different times, as indicated on this state¬ 
ment?—A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that campaign printing?—A. Well, now. I can’t say whether all of 
it was or not, but the biggest part of it was. 

Q. You don’t remember the particular items of printing?—A. I do not. 

Q. What was the character of campaign work you got out for him?—A. Some 
poster cards, some folders, envelopes—I can tell you by that better. 

Q. Well, at any rate, that amount of money was paid to you for work during 
that campaign?—A. Yes, sir. 

Cross-examination by Mr. Dieterich : 

Q. You don’t know whether that amount is campaign work?—A. I don’t 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


47 


4i 


AFFIDAVIT. 

State of Illinois, 

Count)/ of Cass, ss: 

I, Dick Spicker. having lirst been duly sworn, do hereby certify that I have 
carefully read the foregoing deposition, and do affirm and acknowledge it as a 
true statement of the facts and circumstances as set forth therein. 

Dick- Spicker. 

Sworn and subscribed before me. a notary public in and for the county of 
Cass, State of Illinois, this 11th day of April, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 27. 1923. 

Which were all of the depositions taken in the proceedings on this date. 

STIPULATION. 

It is stipulated between the parties and by their respective attorneys present 
that the reporter who takes this evidence in shorthand may transcribe his 
notes into typewr'tten matter as soon as possible and not later than the 6tli 
day of April, A. P. 1921, and may deliver them to the notary public before 
whom this testimony is taken, and that the notary public may then submit 
each witness’s testimony to the witness and have him sign it and swear to it, 
and it may be then forwarded to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, 
at Washington, P. C., with like effect as if done on this day. 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 1. 

To Hon. Henry T. Rainey , contestant, and to IE. H. Dietericli and John F. 

McCarron, his attorneys: 

You and each of you will please take notice that on the 2d day of April, 
A. D. 1921, at 9 o'clock a. m. of said day. at the directors’ room of the Beards- 
town State Bank, No. 120 Second Street, Beardstown, Ill., the contestee will 
take the depositions of the following-named witnesses: Hon. Guy L. Shaw 
(contestee), E. T. Hunter, W. J. White, John P. Spicker, G. W. Morton, 
William Scullion. C. F. Neiinan, A. C. Davis, Louis Heeman, W. F. Thron, 
Harry Harper, J. E. Haywood, Pearl Wagner, Pearl Nelson, Helen Steadman, 
A mil Wagner, Roy Phelps, all of Beardstown. Ill., to be offered and used on 
behalf of contestee in this proceeding. Said depositions will be taken before 
and certified by P. M. Maney, a notary public in and for Cass County, Ill., 
under the provisions of the law in that respect made. 

Taking of said testimony and depositions will he continued from day to day 
until the same are completed, when and where you may act as advised, etc. 

Done at the city of Pittsfield, in Pike County, Ill., this March 22, 1921. 

William Mumford, 

Barry Mumford, 

Attorneys for Contestee. 

County of Cass, 

State of Illinois, ss: 

G. W. Morton, being first duly sworn, on his oath says that he served the 
above and foregoing notice upon the attorney for contestant, W. H. Dieterich, 
Esq., at said Cass County by delivering to him a true copy thereof this 23d 
day of March, A. D. 1921. 

G. W. Morton. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of March, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] I). M. Maney, 

Notary Public. 


My commission expires January 27, 1923. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 2. 


[Post Office Department. Official business. Original Reg. No. 1363.] 

Postmark of delivering office and date of delivery: Beardstown. Ill., March 
26, 7.30 p. m. 

William and Barry Mumford, Pittsfield, Ill. 



48 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


REGISTRY RETURN RECEIPT. 

Received from the postmaster registered article, the original number of which 
appears on the reverse side of this card. 

Date of delivery : March 26, 1921. 

Henry T. Rainey. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 3. 

To .Hon. Henry T. Rainey, contestant , and to TV 7 . H. Dieterich and John F. 
McCarron, his attorneys: 

You and each of you will please take notice that on the 2d day of April. 
A. D. 1921, at 9 o’clock a. m. of said day, at the directors’ room of the Beanls- 
town State Bank, No. 120 Second Street, Beardstown, Ill., the contestee will take 
the depositions of the following-named witnesses: Hon. Guy L. Shaw, con¬ 
testee; E. T. Hunter, W. J. White, John D. Spicker, G. W. Morton, William. 
Scullion, C. F. Neiman, A. C. Davis, Louis Heeman, W. F. Thron, Harry Harper, 
J. E. Haywood, Pearl Wagner, Pearl Nelson, Helen Steadman, Amil Wagner, 
Roy Phelps, all of Beardstown, Ill., to he offered and used on behalf of contestee 
in this proceeding. Said depositions will lie taken before and certified by 
D. M. Maney, a notary public in and for Cass County, Ill., under the provisions of 
the law in that respect made. 

Taking of said testimony and depositions will be continued from day to day 
until the same are completed, when and where you may act as advised, etc. 
Done at the city of Pittsfield, in Pike County, Ilk, this March 22, 1921. 

William and Barry Mumford, 

Attorneys for Contestee. 

City of Washington, 

District of Columbia, ss: 

E. J. Howard, being first duly sworn, on his oath says that he served the 
above and foregoing notice upon John F. McCarron, Hon. H. T. Rainey’s attorney, 
at the said city of Washington, by delivering to him a true copy thereof this 
24th day of March, A. D. 1921. 

E. J. Howard. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of March, A. D. 1921. 

[ seal.J T. J. Enright, 

Notary Public, District of Columbia. 

My commission expires October 22, 1925. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 4. 


State of Illinois, 

County of Cass, ss: 


The people of the State of Illinois to E. T. Hunter, IV 7 . J. White, John D. 
Spicker, G. W. Morton, Wm. Scullion, C. F. Neiman, A. C. Davis, Louis nee- 
man, TP. F. Tliron, Harry Harper, J. E. Haywood, Pearl Wagner, Pearl Nel¬ 
son, Helen Steadman, Amil Wagner, Roy Phelps, Olive Steadman: 


You are hereby commanded to be and appear before me, a notary public in 
and for said Cass County, at the directors’ room, in the Beardstown State 
Bank, at 120 Second Street in Beardstown, Ill., in the city of Beardstown, in 
said Cass County, on Saturday, the 2d day of April, A. D. 1921, at 9 o’clock 
a. m. of said day, and from day to day until the taking of the testimony is 
finished, then and there to testify the truth in a certain contest proceeding now 
depending in the House of Representatives of the United States, wherein Hon. 
Henry T. Rainey is contestant and Hon. Guy L. Shaw is contestee in a con¬ 
test of an election of Representative in and for the twentieth congressional 
district of the State of Illinois, and this you and each of you shall in no wise 
omit, under the penalty of the law. 

Given under my hand and notarial seal, at Beardstown, Ill., this 23d day of 
March, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, Notary Public. 




RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


49 


State of Illinois, 

County of Cass, ss: 

^. S. Morton, being first duly sworn, on his oath says that lie served the 
above and foregoing subpoena upon each of the above-named witnesses by de¬ 
livering to each of them a true copy thereof, this 23d dav of March, A. D. 
1921. 

G. W. Morton. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of March, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Maney, Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 27, 1923. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 5. 

Washington, D. C., February lJ f , 1921. 

Guy L. Shaw, 

Beardstown , III. 

Sir: Please take notice that on the 23d day of February, 1921, at the hour 
of 10 a. m., at the office of the Clerk of the United States House of Representa¬ 
tives at the Capitol Building, Washington, D. 0., the deposition of Hon. William 
Tyler Page, Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, Washington. 
D. C.: T. E. Meeker. 701 Albee Building, Washington, D. C.; Hon. John Hollings¬ 
worth, Chief Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, Washington, 
D. C.; Hon Simeon P. Fess, United States House of Representatives, Wash¬ 
ington, P. C.; Hon. Henry T. Rainey. United States House of Representatives, 
Washington. P. C.; in this cause will be taken before Charles E. Gebhardt, Esq., 
Wilkins Building, Washington, P. C., a notary public for the Pistriet of 
Columbia, under the provisions of section 107 of the act of January 10, 1873, 
and section 2 of the act of March 2, 1875, Revised Statutes. Taking of testimony 
will continue from day to day until completed. Please govern yourself 
accordingly. 

W. H. Pieterich, 

John F. McCabron, 

Attorneys for Henry T. Rainey , Contestant. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 6. 

Beardstown, III., February 19, 1921. 

Guy L. Shaw, 

Beardstown, III. 

Sir : Take notice that on the 25tli day of February. A. P. 1921, at the hour 
of 10 o’clock a. m., at the law offices of W. T. Gordley, at 2051 State Street, in 
the city of Beardstown. county of Cass and State of Illinois, the deposition of 
E. T. Hunter, cashier of the Beardstown State Bank of Beardstown. Ill.; 
Robert H. Garni, president of the First State Bank of Beardstown, Ill.; Ledru 
Schaeffer, one of the copartners doing business under the firm, style, and 
name of the Schaeffer Publishing Co.; Rowland Crum, Beardstown, Ill.; Galen 
Morton, Beardstown, Ill.: W. J. White. Beardstown, Ill.; J. P. Spicker, Beards¬ 
town Ill.; Guy L. Shaw, Beardstown, Ill.; H. W. Hackman, president of the 
Beardstown State Bank, of Beardstown, Ill.; Clifford C. Garin, cashier of the 
First State Bank of Beardstown, Ill.; A. E. Schmoldt, in this cause will be 
taken before W. T. Gordlev, Esq.. 205i State Street, Beardstown. Ill., a notary 
public in and for the County of Cass and State of Illinois, under the provisions 
of section 107 of an act of January 10, 1873, and section 2 of March 2, 1875, 
Revised Statutes. Taking of testimony will continue from day to day until 
completed. Please govern yourself accordingly. 

Emil Slessinger, 

W. H. Pieterich, 

Attorneys for Henry T. Rainey, Contestant. 


46991—21 


4 





50 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 7. 

February 11). 11121. 

Mr. W. H. Dieterich, 

Beard stolen. III. 

Dear Sir: I have received from you notice to be in Washington, I>. C . on Feb¬ 
ruary 23, 1921. for the purpose of taking depositions, made all my arrangements 
accordingly, and just on the eve of my departure for Washington you have 
caused to be served on me notice that depositions will be taken in Beardstown, 
Ill., on February 25, 1921. It is, as I believe you know, utterly impossible lor 
me to comply with both of these notices. The taking of depositions in Wash¬ 
ington will consume a considerable amount of time. It is, therefore, impossible 
to do so and return to Beardstown by February 25 to take depositions.' 

I can not do the impossible, and if you insist upon taking depositions in 
Beardstown on February 25. 1921, I will be compelled to move to suppress, 
and will do so. 

If you will arrange to take these depositions at a later date when I can be 
here. I will not offer objections. 

Very truly, yours. 


(Contestee’s Exhibit No. 8, letter from William Tyler Page, Clerk of House 
of Representatives, to Hon. Guy L. Shaw, omitted in printing.) 

(Contestee’s Exhibit No. 9a. primary expenses prior to September 5, 1920. and 
prior to September 30, 1920, and after September 5, 1920, omitted in printing.) 

(Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 9b and 9c, publicity statements for tiling before 
general election and for tiling after general election, omitted in printing.) 

(Note by the Clerk of the House. —Contestee’s Exhibits 8, 9a. 9b, and 9c 
were omitted from the printed record on objection by attorney for contestant 
sustained by the Clerk.) 

(Contestee’s Exhibit No. 10, answer of contestee to notice of contest (dupli¬ 
cate), omitted in printing.) 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 11. 

To the citizens of the twentieth congressional district of Illinois: 

We, the undersigned citizens of the city of Beardstown, Cass County, Ill., 
hereby certify that we have carefully and accurately audited the campaign 
receipts and expenditures of Hon. Guy L. Shaw, covering both the recent • 
primary and the general election, and wherein he was elected to the National 
House of Representatives, and we further certify that such audit shows that 
Mr. Shaw fully accounts for all moneys received by him in connection with said 
campaign and, further, shows that no moneys received by him for campaign 
expenses were in any manner misused by him or converted to any other purpose 
or purposes whatsoever. 

Dated this 8th day of January, A. D. 1921. 

E. T. Hunter, secretary county central committee; Walter P. Meyer, 
precinct committeeman, West Beardstown. No. 1; Roy L: Phelps, 
precinct committeeman, East Beardstown; .T. L. Long; E. H. 
Schumann; F. Wm. Wessel; W. G. Mooney; G. M. Humphrey, 
E. J. Howard. 

y- • .«•< 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 12 a. 

Ridgely-Farmers State Bank, 
Springfield, Til ., October 13, 1920. 

Your favor of 13tli instant received, with inclosures as stated. We credit 
you .$1,000. 

Out-of-town items credited subject to payment only. 

Yours, respectfully. 

Alfred O. Peterson, Cashier. 





RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


51 


Contestee’s Exhibit No. 12b. 

Ridgely-Farmers State Bank, 
Springfield, III., October 26, 1920. 

Your favor of 25tli instant received, with inclosures as stated. We credit 
you $1,000. 

Out-of-town items credited subject to payment only. 

Yours, respectfully, 

Alfred O. Peterson, Ca sh ier. 


House of Representatives, 
Washington, D. C., March 26, 1921. 

Wm. and Barry Mumford, 

Pittsfield, III. 

Dear Sir : I am in receipt of your communication. The matter will receive 
immediate attention. Am in receipt of notice to take depositions. 

Very truly, yours, 

Henry T. Rainey, M. C. 

I, the below-subscribed notary public, here certify and make known— 

That I am an acting and qualified notary public in and for Cass County, Ill. 

That I am the identical person named in the attached notice to take depo¬ 
sitions. 

That I issued the subpoena hereto attached and herewith filed. 

That on the day and at the place named in said notice to take depositions, 
the said parties and their said attorneys attended before me to examine and 
cross-examine each of said witnesses as above reported, and that each of such 
witnesses, after being severally sworn as stated in the caption, testified as above 
reported. 

That by agreement and stipulation of the said parties, contestant and con- 
testee. I continued (he taking and certifying of said depositions from day to day 
to the date of this certificate. 

That each of the above-named witnesses read and signed his several deposi¬ 
tions as above given, and each was severally sworn thereto by me. 

Done at Beardstown, Ill., this April 11, A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] D. M. Manky, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 27. 1923. 

DEPOSITIONS FOR CONTESTANT IN REBUTTAL. 

The depositions of T. .T. Schvveer, Joseph Elliott, and George I. Buck, of 
the city of Beardstown, in the county of Cass and State of Illinois, witnesses 
of lawful age, produced, sworn, and examined upon their respective corporal 
oaths on the 16tli day of April, A. D. 1921, at the olfiee of W. T. Gordley, at 
2051 South State Street, in the city of Beardstown. in the county of Cass and 
the State aforesaid, by me, W. T. Gordley, a notary public in and for the 
county of Cass and State of Illinois, the said T. J. Schweer. Joseph Elliott, and 
George I. Buck, each being first duly sworn by me as witnesses in said cause 
previous to the commencement of their respective examinations to testify the 
truth, as well on the part of Henry T. Rainey, contestant, as Guy L. Shaw, 
contestee, in relation to the matters in controversy between the said contestant 
and contestee. so far as should be interrogated, testified and deposed as follows. 

At the taking of said depositions W. II. Deiterich appeared as attorney for 
the contestant, Henry T. Rainey, and William Mumford appeared as attorney 
for Guy L. Shaw, contestee. 

Previous to the commencement of the examination of witnesses W. H. 
Deiterich. on behalf of the contestant, offered in evidence notice of taking of 
depositions served upon William Mumford, attorney for Guy L. Shaw, dated 
April 11, A. D. 1921 ; affidavit of W. H. Dietericli. subscribed and sworn to April 
16. A. D. 1921, before W. T. Gordley; notice for taking of depositions directed 
to Guy L. Shaw, dated April 9. A. D. 1921, to which is attached two post- 
office registry receipts; subpoena issued by W. T. Gordley. notary public, dated 
February 9, A. D. 1921. all of which are hereto attached. 



52 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


9 

The said T. J. SCHWEER, being first duly sworn by me as a witness in said 
cause previous to the commencement of his examination to testify the truth as 
well on the part of the contestant as the contestee, in relation to the matters 
in controversy between said contestant and contestee, so far as he should be 
interrogated, testified as follows: 

Direct examination by W. H. Dieterich : 

Interrogatory first. State your name. 

Answer to interrogatory first. T. J. Schweer. 

Interrogatory second. Where do you live? 

Answer to interrogatory second. Beardstown, Ill. 

Interrogatory third. What is your business? 

Answer to interrogatory third. Postmaster. 

Interrogatory fourth. What is your profession? 

Answer to interrogatory fourth. Physician and surgeon. 

Interrogatory fifth. How long have you lived in Beardstown? 

Answer to interrogatory fifth. Fifty-one years. 

Interrogatory sixth. That is you have lived here all your life? 

Answer to interrogatory sixth. Yes. 

Interrogatory seventh. At Beardstown, Ill.? 

Answer to interrogatory seventh. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory eighth. Calling your attention to the months of September,. 
October, November, and December, 1920, who, if any one, had charge of the 
outgoing mail at the post office in Beardstown, during that time? 

Answer to interrogatory eighth. Joseph Elliott in the daytime, and George I. 
Buck at night. 

Interrogatory ninth. Mr. Schweer, did you, during the months of September, 
October, November, and December. 1920, or at any other time, give any direc¬ 
tions or instructions to your employees who had charge of the outgoing mail 
or any other employees with reference to any mail delivered to the post office 
by Guy L. Shaw? 

Answer to interrogatory ninth. I never did. 

Interrogatory tenth. Did you yourself ever see or have your attention called 
to or call any other employee’s attention to any mail delivered to the post office 
by Guy L. Shaw, or any one for him, directed to the Clerk of the House of. 
Representatives, at Washington, D. C.? 

Answer to interrogatory tenth. I never did. 

Interrogatory eleventh. You are acquainted with Guy L. Shaw? 

Answer to interrogatory eleventh. Yes. 

Interrogatory twelfth. You knew that he was a candidate for Congress from 
this district at the primary election? 

Answer to interrogatory twelfth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory thirteenth. And that he was a candidate for Congress from 
this district at the general election on the Republican ticket? 

Answer to interrogatory thirteenth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory fourteenth. Did you know during the months of September, 
October, November, and December. 1920, that the law required a candidate for 
Congress to make a statement of his campaign expenses to anyone? 

Answer to interrogatory fourteenth. I did not. 

Interrogatory fifteenth. Did you know during the months of September, Oc¬ 
tober, November, and December, 1920, that a candidate for Congress should 
file a statement of expense with the Clerk of the House of Representatives at 
Washington, D. C.? 

Answer to interrogatory fifteenth. I never did. 

Interrogatory sixteenth. Did you know that there was a provision in the law 
by which a candidate for Congress could comply with the law by mailing a 
statement of his expenses, addressed to the Clerk of the House of Representa¬ 
tives, prepaid and registered? 

Answer to interrogatory sixteenth. No, sir. 

Interrogatory seventeenth. Did you at any time after December, 1920, or 
during December, 1920, obtain the knowledge that there was a law’requiring 
a candidate for Congress making a statement of expense? 

Answer to interrogatory seventeenth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory eighteenth. When? 

Answer to interrogatory eighteenth. I don't know the exact date, but it was 
at the time of the notice of contest of election. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


53 


Interrogatory nineteenth. And you say that it was at this time that you 
acquired the knowledge that such a statement should he made? 

Answer to interrogatory nineteenth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory twentieth. Did you know at this time with whom such a state¬ 
ment should be hied? 

Answer to interrogatory twentieth. No. 

Interrogatory twenty-first. When did you first acquire the knowledge that 
a statement of that character should be tiled with the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives ? 

Answer to interrogatory twenty-first. Here, about two weeks ago, when depo¬ 
sitions were taken before I>. M. Maney; that was the first knowledge I had that 
such statement had to he mailed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Interrogatory twenty-second. Are you acquainted with a man by the name of 
G. W. Morton in this city? 

Answer to interrogatory twenty-second. Y r es. 

Interrogatory twenty-third. Did you ever have a conversation with G. W. 
Morton prior to the general election in November, 1920, in which you stated to 
him that Guy L. Shaw would never he elected to Congress? 

Answer to interrogatory twenty-third. I never did. 

Cross-examination by William Mumford: 

Cross-interrogatory first. Dr. Schweer, what did you say to Mr. Morton? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory first. I don’t know as I ever said anything to 
Mr. Morton. I don't know as I ever held a conversation with Rev. Morton 
in regard to the congressional election. 

Cross-interrogatory second. I do not mean simply to say that you did not 
say to Morton that Guy L. Shaw would not he elected, but I mean to say that you 
never had any conversation with him on the subject? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory second. I mean that I never stated that Guy 
L. Shaw would not be elected and I do not remember ever having had any con¬ 
versation with him in regard to the congressional election. 

Cross-interrogatory third. Have you in mind, Dr. Schweer, the street corner 
at which Mr. Morton claimed the conversation was said? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory third. I do not know where he claims the con¬ 
versation was held, as I never read his evidence. 

Cross-interrogatory fourth. Did you ever have any political discussion or con¬ 
versation with him during the campaign? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fourth. I do not remember of any. 

Cross-interrogatory fifth. You are not able to say that you did not have any 
such conversation ? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fifth. I do not remember, hut do not say that 
I did not discuss anything with him in a general way. 

Cross-interrogatory sixth. You knew, Dr. Schweer, that Mr. Morton was 
strongly supporting Mr. Shaw? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory sixth. Not necessarily so. 

Cross-interrogatory seventh. Well, what did you mean, that you did not 
know? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory seventh. No; I did not. 

Cross-interrogatory eighth. You. of course, were opposed to Mr. Shaw? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory eighth. I was not working for him. 

Cross-interrogatory ninth. Were you working against him? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory ninth. I was not. 

Cross-interrogatory tenth. Of course, your political connection was with an¬ 
other party? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory tenth. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory eleventh. And you are a personal friend of the Demo¬ 
cratic candidate? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory eleventh. Yes, sir. 

Cross-interrogatory twelfth. What was your attitude and what was your 
feeling toward Mr. Shaw, friendly or hostile? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twelfth. My feelings toward Mr. Shaw were 
neutral, neither friendly nor hostile; I had no part in the campaign. 

Cross-interrogatory thirteenth. Did you. Dr. Schweer, or did you not have 
feelings of personal hostility toward Mr. Shaw? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory thirteenth. I did not. 

Cross-interrogatory fourteenth. You were postmaster during the whole cam¬ 
paign? 


54 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Answer to cross-interrogatory fourteenth. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory fifteenth. What part of your time did you personally 
give to the office in Beardstown, about what portion? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fifteenth. I reported at the office every morn¬ 
ing at 7 o’clock a. m.; then I was there on and off until 6 o’clock p. m., being al¬ 
ways there at closing time. 

Cross-interrogatory sixteenth. Were you reasonably constant in your at¬ 
tendance through the day at the office? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory sixteenth. Yes, sir. 

Cross-interrogatory seventeenth. Were you not engaged in the practice of 
medicine? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory seventeenth. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory eighteenth. But your principal personal attention was 
given to the office? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory eighteenth. Both of them. 

Cross-interrogatory nineteenth. Did you assist in the distribution or prepara¬ 
tion of mail for shipment? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory nineteenth. No, sir. 

Cross-interrogatory twentieth. So that you would hardly have had an oppor¬ 
tunity to know much about the particular packages of mail that you sent out 
of the office? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twentieth. No, sir. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-first. Are these two employees whom you have 
named the persons who did have that charge? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-first. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-second. What were their hours on duty? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-second. Mr. Elliott went on at 9 o’clock 
a. m. and worked until 6 o’clock p. m.; Mr. Buck went on at 9 o’clock p. in. and 
worked until 5 o’clock a. m.; between 6 p. m. and 9 p. m. no one worked in the 
office. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-third. Do you happen to know at what hour Mr. 
Shaw usually deposited his mail in the office? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-third. I do not. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-fourth. You say, Doctor, that before the com¬ 
mencement of this contest you had no actual knowledge of the requirement of 
the law that these reports should lie furnished? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-fourth. No. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-fifth. After you acquired that knowledge you did 
not know that the law might he complied with by depositing the reports in the 
local post office for delivery? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-fifth. I did not. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-sixth. Can you state about how many pieces of 
mail were handled daily during this period? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-sixth. We keep no account of the pieces 
of mail handled daily. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-seventh. What is the population of Beardstown? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-seventh. About 7,300. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-eighth. How many routes go out from the office? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-eighth. Four city routes and three rural 
routes. 

Cross-interrogatory twenty-ninth. So that the office serves a population alto¬ 
gether of about how many ? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory twenty-ninth. Well, about 7.800; about 500 on 
rural routes. 

Cross-interrogatory thirtieth. Now, is it true, Dr. Scliweer, that the quantity 
of mail is very much greater during a campaign than ordinary times? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory thirtieth. Yes; especially the incoming mail, 
not so much the outgoing mail. I haven’t any means of estimating the number 
of pieces handled per day. 

Cross-interrogatory thirty-first. Are you never required to make a count? 

Answer to cross-interrogatofy thirty-first. Why, once in a while we make a 
count, and on the last count conducted we reported an average of about 2,700 
per day, and that was a 6-da.v run. 

Cross-interrogatory thirty-second. Now, Dr. Schweer, is that outgoing mail 
or both? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory thirty-second. Outgoing; that is what we 
cancel with the machine. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


55 


Cross-interrogatory thirty-third. When was that test made? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory thirty-third. Four or five months ago; don’t 
remember the exact date. 

Cross-interrogatory thirty-fourth. It was after the November election? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory thirty-fourth. No; I think it was prior to it. 

Mr. Mumeord. I think that is all. 

The said JOSEPH ELLIOTT, being first duly sworn by me as a witness in 
said cause previous to the commencement of his examination to testify the 
truth as well on the part of the contestant as the contestee, in relation to 
the matters in controversy between said contestant and contestee, so far as 
he should be interrogated, testified as follows: 

Direct examination by W. H. Dieterich : 

Interrogatory first. State your name. 

Answer to interrogatory first. Joseph F. Elliott. 

Interrogatory second. Where do you live? 

Answer to interrogatory second. Beardstown, Ill. 

Interrogatory third. How long have you lived in Beardstown? 

Answer to interrogatory third. I was born and raised here, was out of the 
city for about five years, but have lived here for last three or four years. 

Interrogatory fourth. What is your business or occupation? 

Answer to interrogatory fourth. Postal clerk. 

Interrogatory fifth. In the post office at Beardstown, Ill.? 

Answer to interrogatory fifth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory sixth. What was your occupation during the months of Sep¬ 
tember, October, November, and December, 1920? 

Answer to interrogatory sixth. Postal clerk. 

Interrogatory seventh. What were your hours of employment? 

Answer to interrogatory seventh. From 9 a. m. until 6 p. m., with hour off 
for lunch. 

Interrogatory eighth. What are your duties? 

Answer to interrogatory eighth. Dispatching outgoing mail and routing in¬ 
coming mail. 

Interrogatory ninth. Did you have charge of the outgoing mail during these 
months of September, October, November, and December, 1920? 

Answer to interrogatory ninth. I did. 

Interrogatory tenth. Did you ever receive any instructions from anyone in 
reference to any mail deposited in the post office by Guy L. Shaw? 

Answer to interrogatory tenth. I did not. 

Interrogatory eleventh. Did you ever have your attention called to any letters 
mailed by Guy L. Shaw addressed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
at Washington, D. C. ? 

Answer to interrogatory eleventh. I did not. When we distribute the outgoing 
mail we just read the city and State that mail is going to; so many letters, in 
fact, we don’t care who the party is they are addressed to; just the city and 
State they are going to. 

Interrogatory twelfth. Did you know during the months of September, Oc¬ 
tober. November, and December, 1920, that it was necessary for a candidate 
for Congress to file a statement of any kind with the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives? 

Answer to interrogatory twelfth. I did not. 

Cross-examination by William Mumford : 

Cross-interrogatory first. Your hours were from 9 o’clock a. m. to 6 p. m.? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory first. Yes, sir. 

Cross-interrogatory second. And during those hours and the months referred 
to by Judge Dieterich you had charge, had you not. of the placing of the 
outgoing mail? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory second. I did. 

Cross-interrogatory third. In handling the number of letters which would 
come to you you paid no attention to the addressee, but only to the place of 
destination? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fhird. That’s all. 

Cross-interrogatory fourth. So you are not able to say whether reports from 
Mr. Shaw to the Clerk of the House of Representatives were ever received at 
the post office or not? 


56 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


Answer to cross-interrogatory fourth. I couldn’t. 

Cross-interrogatory fifth. You had no instructions on this subject and had 
nothing to call your attention to it? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fifth. Nothing whatever. 

Mr. Mumford. That is all. 

The said GEORGE I. BUCK, being first duly sworn by me as a witness in said 
cause previous to the commencement of this examination to testify the truth, 
as well on the part of the contestant as the contestee, in relation to the matters 
in controversy between said contestant and contestee, so far as he should be 
interrogated, testified as follows: 

Direct examination by W. H. Deiterich : 

Interrogatory first. State your name. 

Answer to interrogatory first. George I. Buck. 

Interrogatory second. Where do you live? 

Answer to interrogatory second. Beardstown, Ill. 

Interrogatory third. How long have you lived in Beardstown? 

Answer to interrogatory third. All my life. 

Interrogatory fourth. What is your business? 

Answer to interrogatory fourth. Postal clerk. 

Interrogatory fifth. Employed at the Beardstown post office? 

Answer to interrogatory fifth. Yes, sir. 

Interrogatory sixth. When were your hours of employment? 

Answer to interrogatory sixth. Nine p. m. to 5 a. m. 

Interrogatory seventh. Were you assigned any particular dut'es in reference 
to the mail at the post office? 

Answer to interrogatory seventh. Dispatching and receiving all mail at night 
between those hours. 

Interrogatory eighth. You had personal charge of that, did you? 

Answer to interrogatory e'ghth. Yes. 

Interrogatory ninth. I>d you ever receive any instructions with reference 
to any mail delivered to the post office by Guy L. Shaw? 

Answer to interrogatory ninth. I did not. 

Interrogatory tenth. You know Guy L. Shaw, do you? 

Answer to interrogatory tenth. \"es. 

Interrogatory eleventh. Did you ever have your attention called to any 
letters delivered by Guy L. Shaw to the post office addressed to the Clerk of 
the House of Representatives at Washington, D. C.? 

Answer to interrogatory eleventh. I did not. 

Interrogatory twelfth. Do you know whether any letters were received at 
the post office from Guy L. Shaw addressed to the Clerk of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives? 

Answer to interrogatory twelfth. I do not. 

Interrogatory thirteenth. You knew Guy I,. Shaw was a candidate for Con¬ 
gress during that fall? 

Answer to interrogatory thirteenth. I did. 

Interrogatory fourteenth. Did you know during the months of September, 
October, November, and December, 1920, that it was required that a candidate 
for Congress file any kind of a statement with the Clerk of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives? 

Answer to interrogatory fourteenth. I did not. 

Cross-examination by William Mumford : 

Cross-interrogatory first. Mr. Buck, you left the actual service at 5 o’clock 
a. m. of the office ? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory first. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory second. And your successor came on at 9 o’clock a. m.? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory second. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory third. Mr. Buck, between the hour you left and the hour 
Mr. Elliott came on. who, if any one, was in charge of the office? 

Answer to cross- nterrogtitorv th’rd. Different ones; they changed off; one 
week one was in charge and the next another. 

.Cross-nterrogatory fourth. Between you and Mr. Elliott you mean? You 
mean you and Mr. Elliott took turns about? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fourth. No; between the hours of 5 a. m. and 
9 a. m. there is no one at the office but the general delivery clerk, and the carriers 
come on at 7 a. m., but they have no charge of the out-going mail. 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


57 


Cross-interrogatory fifth. So that between 5 in the morning and 9 in the fore¬ 
noon there was no one at the office who had anything to do with the out-going 
mail? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory fifth. No. 

Cross-interrogatory sixth. Wouldn’t Dr. Scliweer he there at that time? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory sixth. He came on at 7 o’clock too. 

Cross-interrogatory seventh. Of course, after Dr. Scliweer came on at 7 and 
before Mr. Elliott came on at 9 it is true, I assume, that Dr. Scliweer or any other 
person in the office would have or could have access to the letters that were de¬ 
posited for transmission? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory seventh. Yes. 

Cross-interrogatory eighth. You have no knowledge as to whether the letters 
were placed in the post office or not? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory eighth. No. 

Cross-interrogatory ninth. Do you know, Mr. Buck, at what hours Mr. Shaw 
usually deposited his mail? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory ninth. No. 

Cross-interrogatory tenth. Is there just one box at the office in which out¬ 
go ng letters are deposited by patrons? 

Answer to cross-interrogatory tenth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mumford. I think that is all. 

Redirect examination by W. H. Dieterich : 

Redirect interrogatory first. Mr. Buck, how many employees were there in 
the post office working in any capacity during the months of September, October, 
November, and December, 1920? 

Answer to redirect interrogatory first. You mean the exact number of all of 
them ? 

Redirect interrogatory second. Not including rural or city route men. 

Answer to redirect interrogatory second. Just clerical? 

Redirect interrogatory third. Yes. 

Answer to redirect interrogatory third. Five. 

Redirect interrogatory fourth. Five besides you and Mr. Elliott? 

Answer to redirect interrogatory fourth. No: with us. 

Redirect interrogatory fifth. Does that include the postmaster? 

Answer to redirect interrogatory fifth. Well, lets see, there was Miss Fischer. 
Mr. Williams, Miss McClain, Air. Elliott, and myself. 

Mr. Dieterich. That is all. 

It is stipulated and agreed by and between W. H. Dieterich. attorney for 
Henry T. Rainey, contestant, and William Mumford, attorney for Guy L. Shaw, 
contestee. that the testimony taken herein may be transcribed by the stenog¬ 
rapher and presented to the witnesses for signature upon the completion of the 
transcript. 

I, W. T. Gordley. a notary public, in and for the county of Cass and State of 
Illinois, selected to take the depositions of the said T. .T. Scliweer. Joseph F. 
Elliott, and George I. Ruck, witnesses whose names are subscribed to the fore¬ 
going depositions, do hereby certify that previous to the commencement of the 
examination of the said witnesses in a certain proceeding pending in the House 
of Representatives of the United States of America on contest of election of 
Guy L. Shaw for Representative in Congress for the twentieth congressional 
district of the State of Illinois, wherein Henry T. Rainey is contestant and 
Guy L. Shaw is contestee, the said T. ,T. Schweer, Joseph F. Elliott, and George 
I. Buck were duly sworn by me as such notary public to testify the truth in 
relation to the matters in controversy between said contestant and contestee 
so far as they should be interrogated concerning the same; that the said depo¬ 
sitions were taken by me at my office at 2054 State Street, in the city of Beards- 
town, county of Cass and State of Illinois, on the 16th day of April, A. D. 
1921; that I caused all oral interrogatories directed to be put to each of said 
witnesses, whether proposed by contestant or contestee, together with the 
answers of said witnesses thereto, to be reduced to writing in the order in 
which they were proposed and answered, as in said depositions set forth, and 
that thereupon said depositions were signed and sworn to before me as such 
notary public by said witnesses. 

[seal.] W. T. Gordley. 

Notary Public in and for County of Cass and State of Illinois. 


58 


RAINEY VS. SHAW. 


Beardstown, III., April 9, 1921. 

Guy L. Shaw, 

Beafdstown, III. 

Sir: Take notice that on the 16th day of April, A. D. 1921, at the hour of 
2 p. m. at the law offices of W. T. Gordley, at 205i State Street, in the city of 
Beardstown, county of Cass and State of Illinois, the deposition of Theodore 
J. Schweer, Beardstown, Ill.; Joseph Elliot, Beardstown, Ill.; George I. Buck, 
Beardstown, Ill., in this cause will he taken before W. T. Gordley, Esq.. 205i 
State Street, Beardstown, Ill., a notary public in and for the county of Cass 
and State of Illinois, under the provisions of section 107 of an act of January 
10, 1873, and section 2 of March 2, 1875, Revised Statutes. Taking of testimony 
will continue from day to day until completed. Please govern yourself accord¬ 
ingly. 

John F. McCarron, 

W. H. Dieterich, 

A ttorneys for Henry T. Rainey, Contestant. 

Received copy of the within notice this lltli day of April, A. D. 1921. 

William Mumfobd, 
Attorney for Guy L. Shaw, Contest.fie. 


State of Illinois, County of Cass, ss: 

W. H. Dieterich, being duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he did 
on the 9th day of April, A. D. 1921, at Beardstown, Ill., deliver a copy of the 
attached notice to E. J. Howard, whom, this affiant is informed and believes 
to be secretary of Guy L. Shaw; that he did on the same date mail a copy 
of said notice to William Mumford, the attorney for said Guy L. Shaw, at 
Pittsfield, Ill.; that he did on said last above date deposit a copy of said 
notice, postage prepaid and registered, to Guy L. Shaw, addressed Guy L. Shaw,. 
Member of Congress from Illinois, Washington, D. C. 

W. H. Dieterich. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of April A. D. 1921. 

[seal.] W. T. Gordley, 

Notary Public. 


Guy L. Shaw, 

Beardstown, III. 


Beardstown, III., April 9. 1921. 


Sir: Take notice that on the 16tli day of April, A. D. 1921. at the hour of 2 
p. m., at the law offices of W. T. Gordley, at 205* State Street, in the city of 
Beardstown, county of Cass and State of Illinois, the deposition of Theodore 
J. Schweer. Beardstown, Ill.; Joseph Elliot, Beardstown, Ill.; George I. Buck, 
Beardstown, Ill., in this cause will be taken before W. T. Gordley, Esq., 205* 
State Street, Beardstown, Ill., a notary public in and for the county of Cass 
and State of Illinois, under the provisions of section 107 of an act of January 
10, 1873, and section 2 of March 2, 1875, Revised Statutes. Taking of testi¬ 
mony will continue from day to day until completed. Please govern yourself 
accordingly. 

John F. McCarron, 

W. H. Dieterich. 

Attorneys for Henry T. Rainey, Contestant. 


[Post Office Department. Official business. Registered article No. 2297. Insured parcel.] 


Postmark of delivering office and date of delivery, Pittsfield, Ill., April 11, 
1921, 6 p. m. 

W. H. Dieterich, Beardstown, Ill. 


[Reverse.] 


RETURN RECEIPT. 

Received from the postmaster the registered or insured article, the original 
number of which appears on the face of this card. 

William Mumford. 

Date of delivery, April 11, 1921. 


RAINEY YS. SHAW. 


59 


[Post Office Department. Official business. Registered article No. 2295. Insured parcel.) 

Postmark of delivering office and date of delivery, Washington, D. C., April 
12, 1921, 6 p. m. 

W. H. Dieterich, Beardstown, Ill. 


[Reverse.] 


RETURN RECEIPT. 


Received from the postmaster the registered or insured article, the original 
number of which appears on the face of this card. 


Ilo I. Emmort. 


State of Illinois, 

Cass County , ss: 

The people of the State of Illinois to Theodore J. Schweer, Joseph Elliott, and 
George I. Buck: 

You are hereby commanded to appear before me, a notary public in and for 
said county, at my office, No. 2051 State Street, in the city of Beardstown, in 
said county, on Saturday, the 16th day of April, A. D. 1921, at 2 o’clock p. m., 
and from day to day until the testimony is completed, then and there to testify 
the truth in a suit now pending in the House of Representatives of the United 
States wherein Henry T. Rainey is contestant and Guy L. Shaw is contestee in 
an election contest for the twentieth congressional district, and this you shall 
in no wise omit, under the penalty of the law. 

Given under my hand and notarial seal this 9tli day of February, A. I). 1921. 
[seal.] W. T. Gordley, 

Notary Public. 

State of Illinois, 

County of Cass, ss: 

W. H. Dieterich, being ffrst duly sworn, deposes and says that he served 
the within subpoena by reading the same to and leaving a copy thereof with 
the within-named witnesses, Theodore J. Schweer, Joseph Elliott, and George I. 
Buck, on the 9th day of April, A. D. 1921. 

AY. H. Dieterich. 


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of April, A. D. 1921. 
[seal.] W. T. Gordley, 

Notary Public. 























INDEX 


Page.. 

Notice of contest_ 3 

Proof of service_ 4 

Answer of contestee to notice of contest_ 4-5 

Appearances for contestant: 

Dieterich. W. H__19, 37, 51 

McCarron, John F_ 5 

Rainey, Henry T_5,19, 37 

Appearances for contestee: 

Shaw, Guy L_5,19, 37 

Mumford, William_5,19,37,51 

Communication from Hon. Henry T. Rainey to William and Barry Mum- 

ford _ 51 

Notary public’s subpoenas_ 5, 59 

Notary’s certificate_16,51,57,59 

Note by Clerk of House relating to omission of testimony from printed 

record_ 18 

Notices to take depositions_ 58 

Officers before whom depositions were taken : 

Gebhardt, Charles E_ 5 

Gordley, W. T_ 51 

Maney, D. M_ 19 

Post-office registry receipts_58-59 

Stipulation_47,57 

Testimony for contestant_5-16, 51-57 

Testimony for contestee_19-47 

Witnesses for contestant: 

Meeker, T. C_15-16 

Page, William Tyler_10-14,15 

Rainey, Henry T-5-10,14 

Witnesses for contestee: 

Haywood, J. E_!_45-46 

Hunter, E. T_,_44-45 

Morton, G. W_ 42-44 

Phelps, Roy L_ 41 

Shaw, Guy L_19-41 

Spicker, Dick_ 46 

Witnesses for contestant in rebuttal: 

Buck, George I_56-57 

Elliott, Joseph_55-56 

Schweer, T. J_;-52-55 

EXHIBITS. 

Contestant’s Exhibit A.—Letter from Henry T. Rainey to Guy L. Shaw, 

inclosing two copies of notice to contest election- 17 

Contestant’s Exhibit B.—Post office registry receipts- 17 

Contestant’s Exhibit C.—Notice of contest, omitted in printing-- 17 

Contestant’s Exhibit D.—Letter from Secretary of State to Henry T. 
Rainey advising completion by State canvassing board of votes cast 

at general election_ 17 

Contestant’s Exhibit E.—Proof of service of notice upon the wife of 
Guy L. Shaw to take testimony February 23, 1921, at the office of 

Clerk of the United States House of Representatives- 18 

Contestant’s Exhibit F.—Form letter from chairman national Republican 

congressional committee- 18 


61 









































62 


INDEX. 


Page. 

Contestant’s Exhibits F2 and F3.—Publicity statements for tiling- before 

general election and after general election, omitted in printing- 18 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 1.—Notice to take depositions_ 47 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 2.—Post-office registry receipt-- 47 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 3.—Notice to take depositions- 48 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 4.—Notary public’s subpoena- 48 

Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 5 and 6.—Notices to take depositions—- 49 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 7.—Copy of letter regarding taking of testimony 

at Beards town, Ill., February 25, 1921_ 50 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 8.—Letter from Clerk of House of Representa¬ 
tives to Hon. Guy L. Shaw, omitted in printing- 50 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 9a.—Primary expenses prior to September 5, 1920, 
and prior to September 30, 1920, and after September 30, 1920, omitted 

in printing_ 50 

Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 9b and 9c.—Publicity statements for tiling- 
before general election and for filing after general election, omitted in 

printing _ 50 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 10.—Answer to notice of contest, omitted in 

printing _,_ 50 

Contestee’s Exhibit No. 11.—Certification of citizens of Beardstown, Ill., 

as to auditing campaign receipts and expenditures of Hon. Guy L. Shaw_ 50 
Contestee’s Exhibits Nos. 12a and 12b.—Bank-deposit receipts from 
Ridgely Farmers State Bank_50-51 

o 


H. 


. ■*- ■ 















LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





























